EFFIGIES DOCTISSIMI UIRI D NI FRANCISCI WHITE, S. T. PROFESSORIS ET ECCLESIAE CATHIS CARLEOLENSIS DECANI A o AETA 59 ANNO 1624
Wisdome and grace see in that modest looke.
Trueth's [...] errors downfall in this booke
‘Maerebunt piscatores’ Isa. 19. 8.

[Page]

HONI SOIT QVI MAL Y PENSE

BEATI PACIFICI

A REPLIE TO Iesuit FISHERS answere to certain questions propoūded by his most grati: ous Ma tie: King IAMES.

Bv Francis WHITE D. of Div Deane of Carlile, Chaplaine to his Ma tie.

Hereunto is annexed a Conference of the right: R: B: of S t Dauids wth the same Iesuit.

Cirprianus de lapsis. Nec Eccle­siae iungitur qui ab Euāgelio seperatur.

VERITAS VNIVOCA. VERITATE APERIT DIES
MENDACIV̄ AEQUIVOCŪ. ERROR CAECUS ET FALLAX
PISCATORIS RETE HABET RANAS

LONDON

Printed by Adam Islip. 1624.

TO THE MOST HIGH AND POTENT MONARCH, JAMES, OF GREAT BRITTAINE, FRANCE, and IRELAND, King, Defender of the Faith; my Soueraigne Lord and Maister.

MOST GRACIOVS, and Religious Soueraine, it is apparent, that the ex­ternall Tuition and Pro­jection of Orthodoxall Veritie, and Religion, next vnder the Almigh­tie, doth principally be­long to Christian Princes, which are by Office and Vocation, the Lords Annointed, Sonnes of the most High, and supreme Regents of this in­ferior World, vnder God. The Donates in times past denyed the lawfull Authoritie of [Page] Christian Princes, in superuising and externall gouerning Ecclesiasticall Causes, saying, Quid est Imperatori cum Ecclesia? What hath Im­periall (or Regall) Maiestie to doe with the Church. But Optatus stileth this a braine-sick Optat. lib. 3. c. Parmen. Error, saying, Ille Parmenio furore succensus, &c. And S. Augustine contesting with these Aug. c. Cresc. lib. 3. ca. 51. malepart Heretikes, saith, Jn hoc Reges Deo ser­uiunt, &c. Kings, according to the Diuine Pre­cept, serue the Lord as they be Kings, when they command good, and prohibite euill; not in Ciuile Affaires onely, but in Matters which concerne Diuine Religion. Jsiodor. Hispal. saith, Isid. d. sum. bon. lib. 3. ca. 53. Secular Princes sometimes (that is, when they are Christians) haue eminent Authoritie, intra Ecclesiam, within the Church, to fortifie Ecclesi­asticall Discipline. Princes of the Earth (saith S. Augustine) serue Christ, by making Lawes for Aug. Epist. 48. ad Vincent. Christ. And againe, Ciuile Vertues (in higher Idem, Ep. 52. ad Macedon. Powers) auaile them not for eternall Beatitude, vnlesse withall they gouerne their People in true Religion. And in another Epistle: Jt apper­taines Idem, Ep. 61. ad Dulcit. to Religious Princes, to represse by iust seueritie, not onely Adulterie, Homicide, and other hainous Crimes (against men) but also Sa­crilegious Jmpietie (against God.)

The Euangelicall Prophet fore-tells, that Kings should be [...] Nursing, or Foster-Fathers of the Christian Church, Esa. 49.23. Also they are Shepheards of the Almightie, and [Page] concurrents for the building of his House, Esa. 44.28. King Josiah reformed the Iewish Church, suppressed Impietie, restored true Religion, 2. King. 23. And hee was herein so farre from transcending the bounds of Regall Authoritie, that the Holy Ghost faith of him, Like him, was there no King before him; neither after him arose there any like. Constantine the Euseb. Hist. Ec­cles. li. 10. ca. 9. Et d. vit. Const. li. i. ca. 37. Mi­nistrorum Dei coegit Concili­um, lib. 2. c. 43. lib. 3. ca. 6, 10, 12, 16, 17, 18, 23. Interdum [...] quae ad Ecclesiarum Dei commodū spectabant pre­scribendo. & ib. ca. 63. & lib. 4. c. 14. c. 18. Fe­stos dies insti­tuit, ca. 22, 23, 27. Episcopo­rū Decreta cō ­firmauit. Theo­derit. Hist. Ec­cles. li. 1. cap. 7. Great, by Imperiall Lawes established true Religion: Hee appointeth Festiuall Dayes, prescribeth what Bishops shall doe, for the Churches auaile; Hee [...] Synods, is himselfe an Assessor and Agent among the Nicene Fathers; Hee [...], and directeth the Bishops; Hee confirmeth the Decrees of the Great Councell of Nice, and compelleth his Christian subjects to professe the Faith de­termined in that Synod. Now of this Grand Patron of Christian Faith, and the true Pro­fessors thereof, S. Augustine affirmeth, The God of Heauen enriched him with such large Blessings in this World, Quanta optare nullus August. d. Ciu. Dei, li. 5. c. 25. auderet, as one could not haue presumed to wish. S. Cyrill of Alexandria writing to Christian Princes which did the like, sayth: The Ori­ent Pearles, and bright-shining Diamonds of Jndia, doe not so much adorne your Royall Heads, as your care and protection of true Pie­tie, maketh your sacred Persons venerable, and glorious.

[Page] Your most excellent Maiestie walketh in the Religious wayes of those renowned Prin­ces, and their example hath euer been the Pre­sident of the exercising your Royall Authori­tie in sacred Causes, and of your constant reso­lution in professing and protecting true Reli­gion. The Almightie hath placed you ( within your Dominions) his supreme Vicegerent: He hath made you greater than Joseph ouer his House, and a Joshua ouer his People; you are a Signet vpon the Lords right hand, neuer to be plucked off; He hath exalted you, in Hominem a Deo secundum, & quicquid est a Deo consecu­tum, & solo Deo minorem (as Tertullian spea­keth) Tertul. ad Scap. ca. 2. the immediate visible person ( within your Kingdomes) vnder himselfe, receiuing all your Authoritie and Maiestie from his owne hand; and hee hath made you inferior to none, but himselfe: and to vse S. Cyrils words, vttered to Cyril, c. Iulian. Praef. ad Theo­dos. Theodosius, Vestrae serenitati nullus status est aequalis, No State is equall (much lesse may ouer-top) your serene Maiesties.

But together with your Regall Power and Angel. Politian. li. d. Polit. Dis­ciplina. Iacob' primus, M. Bri­tanniae Rex, om­ni laude maior, eminet adeo, vt cum Salomone sapiaetissimo di­uinitus judica­to, certare poste videatur, de hu­manarū & diui­narū rerum sci­entia. Authoritie, the Almightie hath enriched your heart, aboue many other Princes of the World, with incomparable Wisdome and Iudgement in matters Religious and Diuine (as not onely your owne subiects, but euen Forrainers haue obserued:) and that is fulfilled in you, which S. Athanasius once vttered in an Epistle to Jo­uianus [Page] the Emperour, Decora & eximia res est in principe, mens discendi auida, & rerum Coele­stium cupido, inde enim fit, vt cor tuum vere sie in manu Dei; It is a gracious and excellent qua­litie in a great Prince, to haue a mind desirous of knowledge, and affecting the intelligence of Coelestiall things: for hereby it commeth to passe, that your heart is indeed in the hand of God.

It is the happinesse therefore of your loyall and Orthodoxall subiects, which answere for Veritie against Error, that they may defend the same before a King, expert in the Questions whereof they dispute, and whose cleare-seeing Iudgement, like the fining Furnace, is able to make difference betweene Gold and Drosse. And this hath animated me, to present my Re­plie ( To a Jesuits Answere of certaine Questions controuerted betweene Papals and vs) to your most sacred Maiestie. I receiued the Aduer­saries Disputation by my Lord Duke of Buc­kingham; who enioyned me, in your Ma­iesties Name, to examine, and answere the same. I could not but admire your Princely zeale, to haue true Religion maintained, as well by Disputation, as by your iust Lawes. And although I was conscious to my selfe, of the want of those more eminent Graces which are found in greater Diuines; yet ha­uing sensibly obserued your owne vnfained and [Page] [...] loue to the Religion which we professe, and being greatly encouraged by the Noble Duke (who is your Maiesties very Image, in the constant profession and maintenance of Orthodoxall Veritie) I became obedient to your sacred Commandement. And now con­cluding, I most humbly desire you (who re­semble him, that dwelling on high, despiseth not things below, accepting euen the poore Widowes Mite, and Goats hayre, where grea­ter Exod. 25.4. substance is wanting) to giue me leaue to consecrate this my Reply to your most serene Maiestie. I confesse, this Worke to be ouer­meane, in respect of your exact Iudgement, and excelse Dignitie: yet in regard of the Au­thor, it is a free will Offering, intended to the honour of God, and of your sacred Maiestie, and to confirme your Liege people in right Faith, and true loue and obedience of your most iust and gracious Gouernment. As an Angell of God, so is my Lord the King, to discerne good and bad; therefore the Lord thy God will be with thee, 2. Sam. 14. 17.

Your Maiesties Chapleine, and Seruant, FRAN. WH.

TO THE READER.

IT is now two yeeres, since I was first called, by my Lord Duke of Buckingham, to conferre with an Honourable Person, who as then began to make Reuolt from the true Faith and Religion professed in our Church. By this Occasion, J entred into a Disputation with one M r Iohn Fisher, a Jesuit, the same per­son which was the Author of the two Bookes, against which my younger Brother, D r Iohn White, wrote his Way to the true Church, and the Defence of the same. After my first Conference with the aforesaid Jesuit, ensued (not long after) a Second, at which his most ex­cellent Maiestie himselfe was present. The Cause (as J afterwards perceiued) of his Pre­sence, was a gracious desire to recouer the fore­said Honorable Person out of the Fishers Net. Then there followed a Third Conference, be­tweene a most Learned and Reuerend Bishop, and the said Jesuit, intended to the same purpose. [Page] Lastly, his Royall Maiestie, in his deepe Judge­ment, hauing obserued by the former Conferences, and especially by the second, that our Aduersa­ries are cunning and subtile, in eluding our Ar­guments brought against them, but of no strength (especially in particular Questions) when they come to the [...], and confirmation of their owne Tenet; He was pleased to haue Nine Questions of Controuersie propounded to the Je­suit, that hee might in writing manifest the Grounds, and Arguments, whereupon the Po­pish Faith in those Points was builded. For his Maiestie, in his owne Judgement and Experi­ence, knew most certainely, That Romists are not able to confirme [...] Faith, either by sacred Scripture, or by antient Tradition. And there­fore their manner is, when they dispute with Pro­testants viua voce to auoid other Controuersies, and to set vp their rest vpon the Questions of the Visibilitie and Authoritie of the Church. There­fore the better to discouer their weakenesse, and to plucke them out of their Fox-hole of Personall Succession, and Vistbilitie, the King imposed this Taske, of writing vpon the Nine Questions. Besides, his Maieftie had experience of the mfaithfull dealing of Pontificians, when they make Relation of such things as passe by word of mouth onely, in priuate Disputations: and hee well vnderstood, [...] the Cretising Jesuit had dealt with a [...] Bishop, and with my selfe: [Page] For had wee beene Schoole-Boyes of thirteene yeeres old, he could not haue made vs seeme more childish and vnskilfull than hee did, dispersing Hundreds of Papers, to his owne prayse, and our disgrace. Wherefore it was necessarie, that some publique Worke, containing the Grounds and Ar­guments of his part, and the Answere and Re­plie on ours, might be extant; wherein neither his nor our Yea and Nay, should take place, sed res cum re, causa cum causa, &c. the weight of matter on each part, might testifie for it selfe. Now who could command this to be done, but the King himselfe? who therefore made the for­mer proposition of Nine Questions to the Jesuit, that the World might see the vttermost of his strength; and againe, they might haue meanes to iudge rightly of our Cause, and of our procee­dings in handling the same. Mine owne pur­pose at the first was, to haue published in Print a Narration of my two Disputations, and (as farre as my Memorie would serue me) I had to that end collected in writing the summe of those Conferences. But obseruing afterwards, by ano­ther Disputation which was printed, that our Ad­uersaries will perpetually tumultuate, and accuse of falsitie, all things which passe not vnder their owne hands; knowing also, that my selfe could not exactly remember all passages of the Jesuits Dis­putation and mine, there being not a word written at the time when wee disputed; J deferred the [Page] printing thereof, vntill this greater Worke was finished. The Aduersarie in this Answere, which his Friend deliuered the King, hath disputed Eight of the Questions propounded by his Maiestie, and he declineth the Ninth, for Reasons well knowne to the World; and in stead of a Disputation, he passeth ouer that Article of deposing Kings, with a Rethoricall Declama­tion. But before the Nine Questions, hee pla­ceth a large Disputation (prouided, no doubt, aforehand, and expecting onely a prosperous Wind of Occasion, to send it abroad) touching the Rule of Faith, concerning Scripture and Tra­dition, the Notes of the Church, &c. Then, to counterpoise the Kings Nine Articles, he char­geth our Church with Nine remarkable Errors (as he accounteth them.) Jn the former part of his Tractate, is contained the summe and sub­stance of the first Conference betweene him and me, before the Lord Keeper, and the Lord Duke of Buckingham. Jn the Questions of Jmages, Transubstantiation, & Communion in both kinds, is contained also the summe of the second Con­ference: but there are many Additions in each Question; and hee handleth matters more exactly in his written Worke, than hee did in his priuate Disputations. J haue examined his whole Trea­tise, and answered euery passage thereof, printing his Worke verbatim with mine owne. The World must take notice, that I am a constant Preacher, [Page] in a Pastorall Charge, and therefore J could not ose such expedition as other men may, which imploy their whole time & strength in writing. Besides, my Worke being finished before Michaelmas last, bath bin long in Printing, by reason of the number of Quotations in the Margen. These Citations are for this cause word for word out of the Authors, placed in my Booke, that the Worke may be more vsefull, especially to such persons as want the benefit of Libraries, and much Reading, themselues. J haue with as much diligence as morally a Scholler can vse, collected my Testimo­nies out of the very Authors themselues. The Rea­der shall not need to feare, or distrust, vnlesse where the Printer hath made Escapes (which cannot al­wayes be auoided in a Worke of this nature.) And I must entreat the Reader, where he obserueth any Error in the Print, to correct the same with his Pen. Neither must the vnlearneder sort be offended, if they light vpon some hard passages, because the mat­ter it selfe is many times very abstruse; and disputing with Aduersaries which are Sophisters, I am compel­led to vse Schollasticke tearmes, and to turne their owne Weapons vpon themselues: But so farre as I am able, I haue endeuored to be perspicuous. Of my Ad­uersaries I request nothing at all (for it is in vaine:) But if they reply, it shall be for their greater honour to set downe my Text, as I haue done theirs. And they shall but beat the ayre, vnlesse they confirme the maine Branches of their Doctrine by Principles of Diuine Reuelation, because Humane Testimonie is [Page] not sufficient to myse Articles of Faith. And I rest as­sured, that each intelligent person will obserue by rea­ding this Worke, that the Aduerfarie (notwithstan­ding he is well verst in Controuersie, and hath in sub­stance said as much as his Cause will permit) yet he is deficient of Diuine proofe in euery Article, and farre more specious in eluding our Arguments, than happie in confirming his owne. But if it be certaine that Popish Faith wanteth the Suffrage of Diuine Testimonie, then we haue sufficient cause to reiect their Doctrine. And if wee could not demonstrate, that the Articles which they maintaine against vs, were contra verbum Dei, contradictorie to the Word of God; yet if by deficiencie of proofe on their side, it appeare, they be extra & praeter, without or besides the Word of God, they cannot be the obiect of Diuine Faith. Lastly, I entreat all, of our part, to prayse God for the benefit of true Religion, maintay­ned in our Church, to auoid Contention among them­selues; for in all Ages the same hath proued pernici­ous and scandalous. Also, to be as deuout in the way of Pietie, as Aduersaries seeme to be in the way of Su­perstition. And because it hath euer beene an Honor to our Profession, to be loyall and obedient to higher Powers, let this be still an indelible Caracter of euery true Brittish Protestant, to reioyce in the peaceable and happy Gouernment of his most sacred Maiestie; & let vs all, so far as it is possible, by our feruent votes and prayers, striue to adde encrease to his dayes, and happines. Far be it from any of our part, in their secret [Page] thoughts, to misconster his actions, or to entertaine the least iealousie of any abatement of his wonted loue to true Religion, planted among vs: for assu­redly he vnderstands the Mysterie of Poperie too well, to thinke any otherwise of it, than formerly he hath done; and no subiect can lay the Cause of Re­ligion more neere their heart, than his most Reli­gious Maiestie doth. And we haue all great cause to glorifie God, who hath blessed our Church with such a wise and constant Defender of the Faith. Now my Conscience vrgeth me to deliuer thus much concerning his Maiestie, because the Aduer­sarie, in some passages of his ensuing Treatise (as by reading you shall obserue) rhetoriseth suspitiou­sly, intending (no doubt) to raise some iealousie in credulous minds, contrarie to this which I haue spo­ken. My selfe therefore, through the gracious Cle­mencie of his Maiestie, being admitted to approach so neere, as to be an eare-witnesse of his admirable Iudgement and constant Resolution in point of Re­ligion, and hereby certainely knowing, that the Je­suit departing from the King, added no improue­ment to his Popish Cause, but vanished with foile and disgrace; J trust J shall incurre no Censure from men iudicious, and louers of Truth, for cer­tifying that, which J obserued by mine owne expe­rience. And thus commending my Labors to the blessing of the Almightie, to the examination of my Superiors in the Church, and to the perusall of those which desire to read them, I addresse my selfe to the ensuing Disputation.

THE CATALOGVE OF QVESTIONS, DISPVTED in this Worke.

1. WHether, of all other, it be the most important Con­trouersie, to vnderstand the Qualitie of the Romane Church?
Fol. 1.
2. Whether Diuine Faith be resolued finally into vnwritten Tra­dition, or into Scripture?
12
3. Touching the Visibilitie, and Notes of the Church in gene­rall.
49
4. Whether the Romane Church is the Onely, Holy, Catholike, and Apostolike Church?
103
5. Whether Protestants erre fundamentally in the Faith?
146
6. Whether Protestants erre fundamentally about Tradition?
149
7. Whether they doe the like, in their Doctrine about Generall Councels?
152
8. Whether they erre, by denying Papall Supremacie?
157
9. Whether they erre in point of Iustification?
161
10. Whether they erre in point of Merit of Good Works?
169
11. Whether they doe the like, concerning the Sacrament of Baptisme?
175
12. Whether they erre in the Doctrine of Reall presence?
178
13. Whether they doe the like about Penance, and Absolu­tion?
185
14. Whether they erre about the Article of the Catholique Church?
193
15. Touching Worship of Images.
209
16. Concerning Inuocation of Saints departed.
287
17. Touching prayer of the ignorant in an vnknowne Tongue.
365
18. Concerning repetitions of Pater-Nosters, Aues, and Creeds, with reference to Merit.
384
19. Concerning Transubstantiation.
390
20. Of Communion in one kind.
459
21. Of workes of Supererogation, and Popes Pardons.
510
22. Of deposing Kings, and giuing away of their Kingdomes by Papall power, directly, or indirectly.
569

IESVIT. TO THE KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MAIESTIE.

Most Gratious and dread Soueraigne, A

A Conference about Re­ligion, betweene Doctour White and me, was occasion that your Maiestie called mee to your Gratious presence, not disdaining to dispute with one so meane and vnworthie B as my selfe, imitating his be­nignitie whose Vicegerent you are, and according to the phrase of holy Scripture, his An­gell. 2. Reg. 14.17. Si­cut Angelus Dei sic est Dominus meus Rex. And as it is the propertie of the good Angell, first to strike feare and terrour into them to whom hee appeares, but in the end, to leaue them full of comfort: In like sort, your Maiestie: For though the first salutation carried a shew of seueritie, yet your dismissing me, was benigne and C gratious, not onely pardoning my earnestnesse, in defending the part of the Catholike Church, but also saying, You liked me the better.

ANSVVER. A

MIrum est, si in facie ho­minis, tantum interuallum inter fron­tem & linguam, vt frons non com­primat linguam: It is strange (saith S t. Augustine Aug. c. Iulian. Pelag l. 1. c. 5. that there should be such a great distance betweene the front of a man, and his mouth, that the shame of his forehead B should not represse the impuden­cie of his tongue. It is vntrue, that his Royall Maiestie, at the Cloase of the Conference, (whereof you speake) gaue you any ap­plause, or the least occasion to coniecture, That hee was taken with any passage of your Disputation. For you propounded nothing, to demonstrate your owne Tenet, or to confute ours, worthie of the great Presence to which you were admitted. But you kept your selfe within your Trenches, and sometimes you were driuen to dissemble your owne Tenet, other-while C (according to the Romish manner) by wyre-drawne distin­ctions and euasions, to elude the waight of his Maiesties Argu­ments, making good the saying of Maxentius, Mens contentioni Ap. Bign. in Bi­blioth. to. 4. Indulgens, & non sanari, sed vincere cupiens, auersa ab eis quae rectè dicuntur, tantum intenta est in hoc, vt inueniat quod pro partibus suis loquatur: A contentious mind, desirous of victorie, and not wil­ling to be reformed, but auerse from right sayings, only deuiseth how to elude Truth, and to speake for his owne part. And as for those words of his royal Maiestie ( I like you the better) they were vttered vpon this occasion: When the Iesuit being pressed about D the point of Temporall authoritie, &c. did at the first seeke eua­sions, in the end kneeling downe, he said, I will deale plainly with your Maiestie; vpon this, the King said, I like you the better: wherin hee was so farre, from gracing his whole Disputation, that not long after, his Maiestie told him, He neuer heard a verier, &c.

IESVIT.

The gratefull acknowledgement and admiration of this your Princely clemencie, makes me desire (from the bot­tome E of my soule) that I could fully satisfie your Maie­stie of my dutifull and loyall affection, which is fast tied vnto your sacred person, by a threefold inuiolable bond. Funiculus triplex difficilè rumpitur Ecclesiast. ca. 4. 12. The Law of Nature obligeth me thereunto, as being your [Page] Maiesties borne subiect, the transgression whereof, were A [...], barbarous, inbumane. The Law of God re­quires the like constant and perfect allegiance at my bands, binding mee to regard you, as his Lieutenant, and to ac­knowledge your power and authoritie, as his Ordination. Rom. 13. 1. So that according to the Doctrine of the Catholicke Church, I must not onely out wardly observe, but also admit your Maiesties will and command with reuerence, into the se­cret closet of my inmost conscience and soule. The Consti­tutions B also of the Order, whereof J am an vn worthie Rom. 13. 5. member, doe strictly command me the same, in seuerest manner charging the subiects thereof, no wayes to meddle in State matters, or in Princes affaires: much lesse vnder pretence of Religion, to attempt any thing, or to consent vnto any enterprise, that may disturbe the quiet and tran­quilitie of Kings and Kingdomes. And seeing wee are so deuoted to our owne Jnstitute, that our Aduersaries there­upon C (amongst many other calummiations) lay to our charge, That we more reuerently esteeme, and carefully ob­serue the Constitutions of our Rule, than the Law of God; I shall for your Maiesties fuller satisfaction set downe some Colloquiū de se­cretis Iesuitarum. part of our Constitutions in this point, in maner following.

Vt ab omni specie mali abstineatur, & querelis Decretum 101. Cong. Sanctae ge­neral. & Con. 12. eiusdem & in mo­nitis generalibus, §. 18. etiam ex falsis suspitionibus prouenientibus, quoad fieri poterit occurratur, praecipitur nostris omnibus D in virtute Sanctae obedientiae, & sub poenae inhabi­litatis ad quaeuis officia & dignitates seu praelationes, vocisque tam actiuae quam passiuae priuationis, ne quispiam publicis & secularibus Principum negotijs quae ad rationem status vt vocant pertinent, vlla ra­tione se immiscere, nec etiam quantumuis requisitus & rogatus eiusmodi res politicas tractandi curam sus­cipere Decret. 57. & Can. audeat aut praesumat. Illa autem omnia, quae à spirituali instructione diuersa sunt, negotia status E censeri debeat, qualia sunt quae ad Principum inter se foedera, vel ad regnorum iura, & successiones per­tinent, vel ad bella tam ciuilia, quam externa.

[Page] Iubet Regula 41. vt secularia negotia vtpote quae A In regulis com­munibus Reg, 41. sunt à nostro instituto aliena & vehementer à spiri­tualibus auocant, multum auersemur. Iubentur con­cionatores societatis a reprehensionibus Principum & Magnatum Reipublicae abstinere, & obedientiam In regulis concio­natorum. erga Principes & Magistratus frequenter & serio, suis in concionibus populo commendare.

Iubent constitutiones [...] vatijs in locis, vt o­remus In Constitutioni­bus. speciatim pro Principibus, eorumque spiritua­li B salute praecipua cura procuranda ac promouenda inuigilemus, ob vniuersale bonum, quod ad multos alios, qui eorum authoritatem sequuntur, vel per cos reguntur proueniet.

Extat denique Instructio pro confessarijs Princi­pum, In Instructioni­bus. qua nostris serio interdicitur, ne occasione huius muneris, rebus politicis aut Reipublicae guber­nationi se immisceant: iubenter etiam hanc instru­ctionem C Principibus ostendere, curareque vt ij pla­ne intelligant quid societas ab eo postulet, quem confessarium sibi eligunt, neque per leges nostras licere nobis alijs conditionibus id oneris suscipere.

J humbly craue pardon for offering so many particu­lars of our Rule vnto your Maiesties [...], which J should not haue done, but out of a most strong desire, to giue your Maiestie satisfaction against such wrongfull D aspersions, wherewith maleuolencie and suspition labou­reth to disgrace vs, and to make vs odious to them, whom (howsoeuer disaffected from vs) we must perpetually re­uerence and obey; of whom vnder God, [...] and the successe of our labours doth principally depend. And when I consider your Maiesties gracious disposition, and excel­lent maturitie and sharpenesse of iudgement, to penetrate assuredly into the depth of affaires, together with our in­nocencie, whereof our owne conscience is vnto vs in stead E of a thousand witnesses, and which (as we are persuaded) doth in the course of our actions and whole proceedings, appeare to any that shall vnpartially, and without pas­sion [Page] looke into them: I cannot despaire, but the Prayers A which for this intent, with teares and afflicted hearts wee daily poure foorth, will at last so much preuaile with the soueraigne Gouernour of the world, in whose hands are the Cor Regis in ma­nu Domini, [...]. ca. [...]. v. 1. hearts of Princes, that your Maiestie may conceiue some better opinion of your (without [...] so much calumnia­ted) [...], as to iudge of vs, according as our Consti­tutions frame vs, and our Actions deserue; not as it plea­seth disaffection to paint vs foorth. B

And as your Maiestie is a liuing Monument of that [...] paragon of France, Henry the fourth, and of his wise­dome and other Princely excellencies: So why may wee not entertaine afarre off, an hopefull thought, that your Maie­stie may one day bee better informed against so many male­uolent suggestions, and see that they proceed from another origin, than our desert: as that famous Prince did, there­upon restoring them, whom sinister information had bani­shed C out of his Kingdome; for which fact (saith the [...] reporteth Pe­trus Matthew, Historiographer of France. Historiographer of France) hee receiued thankes from all parts of the world, euen out of Peru, and Chochin, Iapon, Goa, and China, with presents of some singularities of the Countrey. I obserued (saith the same Authour) the plea­sure which he tooke in speaking of the same action, and what content hee receiued, when as a great Cardinall told him, That by this restoring, his Maiestie had gotten two thousand D learned pennes for his seruice, and perpetuall fame.

When as the Iesuits represented vnto him the Catalogue of Col­leagues, and the thankes of the three Prouinces of France, he vsed these words vnto them, which should serue as an Epigraph vpon all their houses: ‘Assurance follows confi­dence, I trust in you, assure your selues of me; with these Papers I receiue the hearts of all your company, and with the effects I will witnesse mine vnto you: I haue alwayes said, That they which feare and loue God well, cannot but E doe well, and are alwayes most faithfull to their Prince. We are now better informed, I did hold you to be otherwise than you are, and you haue found me to bee other than you [Page] held mee. I would it had beene sooner, but there is meanes A to recompence what is past. Loue me, and I will loue you.’

ANSWER.

Your Oratorie in this Preface is plausible Cyril. Chat. 4. [...], &c. Ireneus, li. 3. ca. 15. Suaso­rius & verisimilis est, exquirens [...] Error, sine fu­co autem, est [...]., and God grant you prooue as faithfull in deeds, as you are a wilie Humiliate in words. The three grounds of Loyaltie and Allegiance to our Soueraigne, related by your selfe; and his Princely Clemen­cie, which hath superabounded, euen towards his enemies, are bonds of Adamant, to tye euery honest heart, to a constant re­solution B of thankfulnesse and fidelitie. And although experi­ence hath raught that, which is the generall voyce of the world, Fides Iesuitica, fides punica, and their pretensions of loue to all those which are aduerse to them in Faith, (as his Sacred Maiestie is, and euer must bee) are but semblances, and perso­nations of Truth: yet high transcendent Charitie may some­times suggest Hope, that it is possible, euen for enemies, to be ouercome with goodnesse, Rom. 12.21. And therefore I will suspend odious presages and coniectures.

But it must also be obserued, that Iesuits are zealous propug­ners C of certaine dangerous Positions, most aduerse to the soue­raigne right of Princes, to wit, Of the absolute immunitie of the Clergie, from their Iurisdiction; The temporall dominion of Romane Popes, ouer absolute Kings and States; Papall power of dispensing with oathes, which may open a wide sea of mischiefe, and frustrate all pretended Rules and Constitu­tions of Orders, so as no securitie can thereby accrue to Prin­ces or temporall States, because the grand Lord Paramount may at his pleasure cancell and release them, or interprete them agreeably to the present occasion. Lastly, their perfidious Do­ctrine D of Equiuocation, and Mentall reseruation, playeth fast and loose, and iuggleth vnder board, nay aboue board, when­soeuer aduantage may be thereby made against vs.

But to view a little neerer the flourishes which the Iesuite makes to get entertainement. Whatsoeuer he pretendeth with his Protestations and Complements, of admitting his Maiesties commands, into the secret closet of his inmost brest: Yet in the very Allegations and Proofes, brought for his and his fellowes sin­ceritie, towards his Maiestie, hee layeth open that polt-foote, which he indeauoureth to hide; persuading in this manner: E

1. A priori, thus,

No Iesuit obseruing the Constitutions of his Order, can inter­meddle in State matters, or Princes affaires.

[Page] Euery Iesuit obserueth and obeyeth the constitutions of his A order, &c. Ergo:

No Iesuit medleth with state matters.

Touching the Maior, we haue learned out of your owne Schoole, how easie it is for you to euade. For State matters (according to your Tenet) In ordine ad Deum, and Ad bonum spi­rituale, become spirituall matters, and so may belong to the Ie­suits proper cognisance. Also, Princes affaires, when the Pope pleaseth to declare them no Princes; are not Princes affaires, but Papall and Ecclesiasticall affaires; and then the Iesuits, stati­sing, B are still in their owne Element.

Secondly, a man must be of strong faith to beleeue your Mi­nor to be Defide, or of morall certitude, if such constitutions be vnderstood as the words sound. At least he must be a stranger to the world, and haue liued an Anchoret, or Recluse in some Caue, who neuer heard of Campian, Parsons, Creswell, Garnet, Suares, Bellarmine, &c. Did F. Parsons obserue these constitutions of his Order, when he wrot his Dolman against his Maiesties ti­tle, &c? Did Creswell the same, when he published his Philopa­ter? C Or, Bellarmine, and Suares, when the one wrote his Apo­logie, and the other, his Contra sectam Anglicanam? Did Mari­ana and Garnet this, when the one instructeth how to cure State mischiefes, by applying a dispatching Antidote to the head; and when the other put his annointed finger into the Powder? Now, what further assurance haue we, That this fawning per­suader holdeth himselfe more bound than his fellowes, to such constitutions as he pretendeth, doe oblige the whole Or­der? But the truth is, the Iesuiticall constitutions are of two sorts: Either Open and diuulged precepts, blased ad faciendum D populum; [Mens bona, fama, fides, haec clarè, & vt audiat Hospes. Pers. Sat. 2.

We Iesuits may not vnder pretence of Religion, attempt or consent to any enterprise, that may disturbe the quiet of Kings and King­domes.]

Or else, priuate and secret instructions, to be put in vre as ad­uantage for promoting the Papacie and Catholike cause, shall be offered. These, as higher and more sacred Principles, ouer­rule the former: and so a Iesuit Breaking his rule, obserueth his rule. This distinction seemeth to be implyed in the very title E of instructions here set downe by the Iesuit, being in the mar­gent stiled, Monita generalia, prohibiting them to interrmed­dle with affaires, Quae adrationem status pertinent, there specify­ing, Principum foedera, regnorum iura & successiones. And besides, [Page] nay against these, Generalia monita, they may haue speciall coun­termanding A instructions, inabling them to thrust their sickle in­to the haruest of Kings: or at least, dispensing, pardoning, and accepting such seruices of theirs, if prosperously performed. Neither haue we heard that euer any of that brood was puni­shed by his Superiour, or by the Popes holy Fatherhood, for attempting in this kind, though without successe. In which case, the endeauours of their fierie zeale, are accounted accep­table sacrifice to the Roman deitie, as may appeare by the in­dulgence vsed towards such of that Order, as haue in England, B France, and other countries, either by seditious bookes distur­bed the successions of Kingdomes, or by traiterous proiects en­deauoured the shaking and subuerting of them.

Your other argument of persuasion, is, à posteriori, from an example of the Renowned French King, Henry the fourth, to whom you wish his Maiestie to bee a parrallell. Your refe­rence looketh this way:

Henry the fourth (a wise King) was prosperous in reentertai­ning the Iesuits: for he receiued thanks and presents from Peru, C China, &c. Also, hee purchased two thousand learned pennes for his fame, &c. Hee found assurance, and safetic followed his confidence in them: hee loued them, and they him. Ergo:

The King of great Brittaine shall doe well to be better enfor­med of the Iesuits fidelitie, and to entertaine them.

Verily, either this Iesuit preuaricateth and pleadeth against his owne Order, or else he by mistake and forgetfulnesse in­farceth D here a rapsodie of some discourse, written in defence and praise of the French Iesuits before Aprill 1610, which euer since that time, hath beene out of date and cassated. An in­stance more vncouth and preposterous, in regard of the issue, he could not haue light vpon. This he saw well enough, when he presumed thus to write to his Maiestie, but he had his aime another way. And what though he paralogize in the seeming direct proposing of his argument, yet he hath his end in men­tioning an instance knowne to the world, Direfull and Tragicall. And so, That troope may hope to intrude by terror, if they cannot creepe E in by fauour. But alas, What poore flashes of proofe doth hee point at? That King bad thanks from the vttermost parts of the world, &c. a deepe deuise for Iesuits farre dispersed to write or procure letters grat ulatorie for the nesting of birds of their [Page] owne feather. I thinke if Iesuits might haue Colledges in Eng­land, A Their remote brethren would thanke vs more than we should doe them: ô, but if the Iesuits were admitted into our bosome, wee should haue (as that King had) presents sent of some Singularities, &c. Rare trinckets, no doubt, for which wee could not pay too deare, though wee sold our Religion and Libertie for them. But in the Example cited, that which sur­passeth, is, The Armie of learned Pennes, which by thousands will march vpon the Plaine of Paper Monuments, for extolling those which nurse vp that brood. But would to God these men did not write sometimes with blood: How they requited that Kings B loue, and what securitie hee enioyed by them, the dolefull Catastrophe shewed.

Male ominatis Parcite verbis.

IESVIT.

No labours would wee spare, nor any indeauours o­mit, nor sticke to venter the losse of any thing deare vnto C vs (except the grace of God, and our eternall saluation) to purchase a small portion of that fauour your Maie­sties meanest Subiects enioy, that wee might in some sort cooperate to the felicitie of the Christian world, which (as wee are persuaded) doth on your Maiesties person singularly depend.

For God (rich in Mercie and Goodnesse) as hee hath made your Maiestie partaker of his Power and Au­thoritis, D in gouerning this inferiour world; so like­wise hee hath adorned you with many excellent gifts, as Wisedome, Learning, Authoritie with forraigne Prin­ces and Common-wealths, made you beloued of your Sub­iects, that on you are cast the eyes of all Christian Coun­treys, as on the Person whom the Prince of Peace hath beyond the rest, inabled to ioyne together againe the parts of Christendome, distracted one from another through E Contiouersies of Religion.

ANSWER. A

It is sufficient, that you haue libertie to deprecate his Gra­tious Maiestie to forget things past, against himselfe and the State, and to thanke his Princely clemencie for the benefit of his mercifull Gouernment, whereof you and others haue ta­sted beyond expectation. But in stead heereof, you discouer in your selues a restlesse minde, neuer to be satisfied, vntill that (like the Serpent) hauing once got in your head, you winde in B all your bodie. Surely, some euill Genius guideth you, other­wise you could not be so impudent, as to sollicite a most iudi­tious and resolute Prince, to be an Apostata from his Faith, and to expose his naturall and loyall Subiects, to the grosse errours and sharking rapine of Romish Harpies. And wherefore must his Maiestie condescend to these heauie conditions? for­sooth, to ioyne together againe, the parts of Christendome distracted, that is, in plaine English, vnder pretext of Reli­gion, to establish lewd Superstition and Roman Tyrannie Zabarel. d. Schism. Quidam summi Pontifices qui magis ad modum [...] Princepum quam Apostolorum Ecclesiam rexerunt, &c. C Math. Paris. Chron. pa. 507. Dicit Rex (Henricus 3) nec volo nec audeo, Domino Papae in aliquibus contradicere..

Libanius the Sophister, in antient time, vpon the like ground, sollicited Iulian the Emperour to Apostasie: but wee say with Saint Hilarie Hilar. c. Au­rent., Speciosum nomen est pacis, & pulchra est opi­nio vnitatis, &c. The name of Peace is specious, and the opi­nion of Vnitie carries a faire shew, but there is no Euangeli­call Peace without Christ (that is, without true Faith and Charitie in Christ.) Saint Augustine Aug. d. ver. Relig. cap. 45. saith, Habet & superbia D appetitum quendam vnitatis, &c. Euen pride it selfe hath a cer­taine desire of vnitie, that it might bee Omnipotent. If Peace bee iust and honest (saith Polybius Polyb. Hist. li. 4. pa. 300.) [...], It is a worthie possession, and most profitable; but if it bee dishonourable and base, [...], it is of all things most shamefull and pernitious.

IESVIT. E

If the requests of the pretended Reformers were such as the Roman Church might yeeld vnto them, without o­uerthrowing the very foundations of the vnitie of Faith: [Page] If in stead of Catholicke Principles mis-liked by them, A they did propose such other of their owne, as she might see some probabilitie, or almost possibilitie of assured con­tinued peace, likely to follow vpon her yeelding in some Points; feeling compassion (in regard of the wound of discord, bleeding in the heart of Christendome) would mooue her to the vttermost approach towards Prote­stants, that the Law of God can permit, though with some disparagement to her honour. B

ANSWER.

You should rather say, If the request of Protestants (a­mong whom the King of Great Britaine is most emment) were such, as that the Romane Prelates might yeeld vnto, with­out hazard of their vsurped Monarchie; If Protestants would consent to sond the holy Scriptures packing, and not reckon the same among Diuine Principles Bosius. d. sig. Eccles. lib. 16. cap. 10. Scriptura non refertur inter hu­iusmodi Princi­pia.; if they would purchase C remission of sinnes, by paying tribute into his Holinesse his Checker Papir. Mascon. d. Episc. vrbis. li, 5. in Bonifac. 8. Prestitit plenam omnium debito­rum remissionem, eis, qui limina A­postolorum inui­sissent. Quo an­no ingens concur­sus, &c. Ioh. vil­laneus se testem facit, auri & diuitiarum, quas Pontifex, populusque Rom. illo anno congescêre., and not seeke to obtaine the same by the merits of the Lambe of God; in a word, if they would permit the Ro­mane Nahash to plucke out their right eye, that their deuo­tion might be framed according to the rule of implicite Faith and blinde Obedience [...] vita Francifci Assis. cap. 6. Caeca obedientia vt quis sit sicut corpus sine anima quod requiescit vbi quis posuerit sine motu.: sensible feeling of her owne re­uiuing greatnesse and lucre, would mooue the Romane Mo­ther (being tender-hearted to them which present her with Red and White Math. Pans Chron. in Henrico 1. pa. 56. Scdis [...] quae nulli deesse consueuit dummodo albi aliquid vel rubei intercedat.) to approach towards Protestants, and to hugge them in her armes, as Apes doe their Whelpes, vn­till with ouer-much kindnesse shee crush out their breath. D

IESVIT.

But so it is, that those that defre her Reformation, bee so many for number, and for Opinions so diuided amongst themselues, that it is impossible shee should satis fie all. E Their Conditions of peace are, That she reforme her selfe, by forsaking definitions of generall Councells, Customes, [Page] Doctrines vniuersally receiued for many ages, time out of A minde confessedly, without any knowne beginning since the Apostles. In stead of these means (so potent to stay stag­gering consciences, and to keepe the Christian world in peace) they present her with the Scriptures vnderstood by priuate illumination (the source of discord, from which an Ocean of strife must needes flow.) These things consi­dered, your most Iuditious Maiestie cannot but see, that her yeelding would not compose debates alreadie begun, but B rather open a wide gap to innumerable new brawles, and bring them into Kingdomes, bitherto (with such dissention) vntoucht.

ANSWER.

Whosoeuer abideth in errour ought to reforme.

The Roman Church abideth in errour, Ergo,

The Roman Church ought to reforme. C

The Assumption is manifest, by the repugnancie of Roman Doctrine, against the Faith of the holy Scriptures, and against the Doctrine of the Primatiue Church, which shall hereafter be prooued in euery point of Difference betweene Romists and vs. But as the Synagogue of the Iewes hated reformation, and persisteth in hardnesse of heart to this day, so likewise Baby­lon will not be healed, Ierem. 51.9.

The Iesuit deliuereth three reasons, why the Romane D Church cannot yeeld to reformation.

The first, is taken from the manifold diuisions of Protestants among themselues, &c. But this Argument (to say nothing of the leading part thereof) is inconsequent: for if Romists erre, then they ought to reforme, whosoeuer they are that admo­nish them and conuince them of errour. And when the an­tient Church abounded with Schismes and ruptures Euseb. vita. Constantin. lib. 2. cap. 6. Socrat. Hist. lib. 1. cap. 3. [...]. Hist. lib. 1. cap. 15. & lib. 6. cap. 25. Chrysoft. sup. 1. cap. Ep. ad Galath. Hanc ob causam deridiculo facti sumus, & Gentibus & Iudaeis, dum Ecclesia in mille partes scinditur., a meanes was vsed to restore vnitie, to wit, a common submission to free and lawfull Councells, congregated, not by Romane Popes, but E by Christian and religious Emperours Reade heereafter in [...] Booke, pa. 151. Zabaril. d. Scys. pa. 542. Olim Im­perator congregabat Concilium.: and these comman­ded points of Controuersie to bee decided, according to the [Page] rule of holy Scriptures Read. pa. 8. & pag. 37. (as I shall heereafter make manifest A in this Treatise) yea sometimes the doctrine of one sound member of the Church, hath beene a Soueraigne meanes to conuert errants, and consequently to reforme such as were mis­led by errour. Neither is reformation vnreasonable or impos­sible, although they which reprooue others, are themselues ex­orbitant in some things; because the same must bee perfor­med, not by accomodation to the humor of Reproouers Iren. [...]. 3. ca. 5. Quis autem medicus volens curare aegrotum, faciet secundum [...] aegrotantis & non secundum quod aptum est medici­nae., but according to the diuine rule, wherein all things are straight and perfect. Lastly, when the Roman Church it selfe is in B Schisme and Combustion (which hapned at the Councell of Constance and Basill, and in the dayes of Antipopes,) shall no re­formation be required, because the Parties litigant, being of contrarie opinions, the same cannot be proportioned according to euery ones seuerall humour?

The second reason taken from Councells, Customes, &c. is de­ficient in both the parts. For neither are the Romish doctrines, to wit, Communion in one kind, Popes pardons, Latin Seruice, Purgatorie, Apocryphall Scriptures, Vulgar Translation pre­ferred before the Originall Text, Transubstantiation, &c. defi­ned C by any generall Councell, or deriued from the Apostles or Primitiue Church, by custome and vniuersall consent: And later Councells and Customes must giue place to holy Scrip­ture. Yea according to S. Augustine Aug. c. Do­nat. post. Collat. ca. 15. Quasi E­piscoporum Con­cilia Scripturis Ca­nonicis fuerint a­liquando compa­rata., no vnderstanding man did euer make the Councells of Bishops, equall to Sa­cred Scripture: And some of our learned Aduersaries Drieds. d. Dog. Eccles. li. 2. pa. 58. D Generale Concilium, Papae, Cardinalium Episcoporum in Scripturis Propheticis intelligendis & exponen­dis non est nunc tantae Authoritatis; quantae fuerat olim Apostolorum Collegium. confesse, That a generall Councell of Popes, Cardinalls, and Bishops, is not of equall Authority with the Colledge of the Apostles. Others Read. pag. 154. & 155. Cusanus, Occham, Panormitan, Almain, forus, Cassander. also of them affirme, That such Coun­cels are fallible, and subiect to errour.

The third reason wherein it is affirmed, That Protestants for­saking the common rule of Faith, present the world, with Scrip­tures vnderstood by priuate Illumination; is grounded vpon a false suggestion: for we assume to our selues no other Illumination than only of ordinarie grace; and we maintaine no other expo­sition E of Scripture as diuine, but such as is deliuered by the ho­ly Ghost in the Scripture. And the sence of holy Scripture de­liuered by the Primitiue Church, is followed by Protestants with farre more respect, than by Romists.

[Page] But our Aduerfaries are the men, who dissembling the A same in words, doe in truth maintaine priuate Illumination: For they affirme, That the Bishops of Rome haue infalli­bilitie of Iudgement, by the immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and not by the studie and meditation of holy Scripture Greg. Val. in 3. p. Tho. Disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 7. §. 41. Siue Pontifex in definicndo, studium adhibeat, [...] non adhibeat, modo Controuer­siam definiat, certè [...] definiet. Azor. Instit. Mor. to. 2. lib. 5. cap. 5. q. 3. Si absque Concilio vllo & diligentia rem [...], ant [...] definiat, Spiritum fanctum sibi assistentem peculiariter habet ne labatur & erret, &c. [...]; d. sig. Eccles. lib. 16. cap. 10. Scriptura non refertur inter eiusmodi prin­cipia, quamuis illa sancta & sacra dicatur. Ibid. Siue fidem spectes, sine qua impossibile est placere B Deo, siue Charitatem [...] prima est virtus, Non ad libros, sed ad Ecclesiam membraque eius est con­fugiendum. Ibid. Ipsa Ecclesia propter Arctissimam cum Deo conjunctionem, non veritati inuititur, sed veritas inuititur Ecclesiae. Stapleton, Relect. Contr. 5. q. z. ar. 1. ad. 3. Ecclesia vt corpus & singula membra significat, aedificatur super Apostolos & Prophetas, id est super Doctrinam & praedicationem eorum: Non autem Ecclesia, vt capita & magistros significat. Illorum enim Fundamentum quate­nus talium, est Spiritus Christi illis promissus, non autem praedicatio quam faciunt, aut Doctrina quam tradunt, pag. 506..

IESVIT.

Wherefore, there beeing no possibilitie, that the Catholike part could gaine Peace to Christendome, by C any yeelding vnto our Aduersaries, either reasonable or vnreasonable; whither should louers of Concord turne themselues, but vnto your gracious Maiestie, that haue in your Power the Affections of Protestants, and therefore would bee the fittest Instrument for their Re-vnion with the Romane Church? The God of Charitie hath put into your Maiesties Heart a de­sire of Vnitie of the Church, and in your Hand an D Oliue-Bough-Crowne of Peace, which you may set on the Head of Christendome; which (wearie of end­lesse Contention) poureth foorth vnto your Maiestie her Suppliant Complaint,

Quem das finem (Rex magne) laborum.

And seeing nothing hindereth, but that your selfe are E not yet satisfied in some Doctrines of the Roman Church, particularly in the Nine Points your Maiestie hath set downe in writing; J humbly present vnto your Ma­iestie [Page] these my poore Labours, for your satisfaction, so A much desired of the Christian World. And to the end that this my Answere may be in it selfe more solid, and better accepted of your Maiestie, before J descend vnto particulars, J thinke best first to shew in generall the Romane to bee the onely true Church: For this was the Occasion and Subiect of the Conference betwixt D r White, and mee. B

ANSWER.

What a vast and impossible (I will not heere say, impi­ous) enterprise doe you, in the depth of your sublimated wit, cast vpon our Gracious Soueraigne? Must his Maiestie haue the Office of a Proctor, and Factor, for the Court of Rome; nay, of a Lieutenant of the Papall Forces, to re­vnite all Protestants to the Church of Rome? Had you meant the procuring of a Free Generall Coancell of all Chri­stendome, C or (at least) of all the Westerne Church, for the reducing eyther of the Deuiate parts home to the Truth, or the exasperated parts to a more charitable complying, in things indifferent, or tollerable (in which discussion, as well the Papacie it selfe, as other matters, might bee subiect to Tryall;) such a Worke might be fit for a Church-man to mooue, and for his Majestie to affect: than whom, no Prince (no, nor priuate Christian) is more forward in Zeale, and furnished in Wisedome, to purge the Distempers, and heale the Wounds of the Christian Church.

But your former words shew the frensie of the Demand, D when you fore-lay this for a Ground (Satis imperitè, nimis obstinatè) That those particular Enormities that wee Protestants call to haue reformed, are the verie Foundations of the Vnitie of Faith, Catholike Principles, &c. And so this your dreamed Re-vnion must bee, not to come (on your part) one step towards vs, but our running headlong to you; which is no other, than a slauish subjection of all Churches to the Papacie, and the trampling Gods Truth, and Gods People, vnder the foot of the vnerrable, vncontroulable Grand Seig­niour of the seuen-Hilled Citie. E

It seemeth you haue forgotten, or would extinguish the validitie and memorie of his Majesties most judicious Wri­tings, in maintenance of Orthodoxe Religion, and of the [Page] Libertie of Christendome, and shaking the verie Foundations A of Papall Corruptions, and Tyrannie: Otherwise, you ne­uer would thus boldly and leaudly call to so puissant a Cham­pion in the Lords Battailes, to sound Retreat: To whom the state of Christendome (to speake in your phrase) pou­reth foorth her Suppliant Complaint; but to an end opposite to your Projects.

— Qua Roma patet, fera regnat Erinnis:
[...]. Metamorph. lib. 1.
In facinus iurasce putes: Dent ocius omnes,
Quas Meruere pati (sic stat sententia) poenas. B

TOVCHING THE NECESSITIE OF VN­derstanding the Qualitie of the ROMAN CHVRCH.

IESVIT.

Thinke best first to shew in generall A the Roman to be the onely true Church. For this was the occasion and subiect of the conference betwixt Dr. WHITE and me, and is the most important, and manifest point of controuersie, in which all other are inuolued.

ANSVVER. B

THe most important? Nei­ther most nor important at all, to all, but onely to those who are either in­uolued in that Church, or vexed by it. If people may attaine saluation without knowing the qualitie of the Romane Church, then it is not of all Questions and Controuersies most important, to know whether C the Romane Church is the true Church or not.

But many people may bee saued without this knowledge, for all they may attaine saluation which are baptised, and which be­leeue [Page 2] and repent, Mark 16, 16. Acts 2, 38. and which haue all A the ordinarie meanes of Saluation, 1. Tim. 2, 4. But without vnderstanding the qualitie of the Romane Church, people may be baptised, beleeue, and repent, and haue all the ordinarie meanes of saluation, as appeareth by the Iewes, Asts 2, 41. and the Eunuch, Acts 8, 37. and Lydia, Acts 16, 14. and many Gentiles Acts 13, 48. and the elect Ladie and her children 2. Iohn v. 1, 2, 4. and the Corinthians, Galatians; Ephesians, and the seuen Chur­ches of Asia, Apoc. 2, 3. &c.

Occham saieth Occham Dial. part. 1. li. 5. ca. 23. Omnis Ecclesia ex­tra quam potest es­se salus potest con­trà fide m errare, extrà Ecclesiā au­tèm Romanam po­test esse salus, quē ­admodum post as­censionem Christi fuit salus ante­quam Romana Ec­clesia inchoaretur. that after Christs ascension many people were saued before the Roman Church had anie being: and AEneas Siluius AEneas Siluius Epist. 288. Ante Concilium Nicenum quisque sibi viuebat, & paruus respectus habebatur ad Ecclesiam Romanam. affir­meth, B That the first 300 yeares, before the Nicene Counsell, small re­gard was had of the Roman Church. Iohannes Maior saieth, Maior C 4. d. 24. q. 3. Indi & Christiani in alijs locis seperati si reliqua ad fidem necessaria crederent, nescij quod Romanus pontifex, fit caput Ecclesiae durum est dicere quod sint in statu damnationis. It were ouer hard to affirme, that the Indians and other Christans, which liue in remote countries, should be in the state of damnation, because they were ig­norant, That the Bishop of Rome is head of the Church, if they beleeue other necessarie Articles of Saluation. And Alchasar saieth, Alchasar Commentar. in Apoc. ca. 20 ver. 1, 2, 3. Annot. 3. Sect. 9. p. 881. Antequam nuptiae cum Romana Ecclesia per receptam publicae Christia­nae fidei consuetudinem celebrarentur, &c. minus frequens cum Roma Communio satis fuit. Francisc. Picus. Mitandul. Theorem. 8. Quod si quis fortè obijciat non videri sibi sanctos illos priscos pontificem veneratos [...] fuisse vt primas illi in vniuersa Ecclesia palàm publice (que) concesserint, sed nequè ad eum pro ambiguis controuer­fisquè fidei rebus, sciscitatum semper miserint, imò & in faciem restiterint atque in scribendis Epistolis non secus cos ac alium quemquam Episcoporum honorare visi sunt respondendum censeo priscae illius Ecclesiae, simplicita­tem fuisse in causa &c. Et addi forraffè poterit temporaria illa bona quae nune Ecclesiastici homines possident occasionem dedisse &c. Illud etiam subdendum quod occupata [...] in rebus Ecclesis, non erat otium de Summi Pontificis primatu curiosè perquirere disputareque, &c. Before such time as the publique nuptials betweene the Roman and other Chur­ches were celebrated, by a common receiued custome, a lesse frequent com­munion with that Church was sufficient.

Seconly, It is no Article of the Apostles Creed, or of any D other ancient Creed, neither is it delinered in any plaine text or sentence of holy Scripture, That all Christian people must receiue their beleefe from the Roman Church; or that the same intirely shall in all ages continue in the doctrine and faith receiued from the Apostles; yea the contrarie is taught in holie Scripture, Rom. 11, 22. But if the doctrine aforesaid were fundamentall, and of greatest importance, the same must haue beene plainely deliue­red either in holy Scripture, August. d. Doctr. Christ. li. 2. c. 9. In ijs quae aper­te in Scriptura posita sunt, inueniuntur illa omnia, quae continent fidem moresque viuen di, &c. Idem d. [...]. E Mer. & Remiss. li. 2. c. 36. Dried. d. Eccles. Dogm. li. 2. c. 3. fol. 60. Gerson. d. vit. Spirit. Lect. 2. Coral. 7. & de Seas. Script. propos. 9. Bellarm. d. verb. Dei li. 4. c. 11. or in all, or some of the auncient Creedes.

IESVIT. A

The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth, 2. Tim. 3, 15. The eminent Rocke and Mountaine filling the whole world, on the top whereof standeth the Tradition of sauing Doctrine conspicuous and immooueable, Ergo, Jt is the most important Controuersie of all other to know, whether the Ro­man Church be the true Church. B

ANSVVER.

Foure texts of Scripture are produced, to proue, that it is the most important controuersie of all other, to know whether the Roman Church be the true Church: but neither are the places of Scripture expounded rightly, neither is the Iesuits islation from them consequent or firme.

1 Although it were granted that the totall certaintie of Chri­stiantie C dependeth vpon the Church, yet because the Roman Church is not the whole Church, but onely a part and member thereof, Rom. 1, 6. and such a member as may erre Franscisc. Pi­cus, Theorem 13. iuxtà [...] quorundam & ju­ris interpretum a­liquornm dogma­ta, fieri posset vt Rom. Ecclesia quae particularis Eccle­sia est contrà [...] distincta, in side aberraret. and proue vn­sound, Rom. 11, 22. The knowledge of the state and qualitie of that Church, cannot be simply necessarie, and consequently not a matter of greatest importance to be vnderstood.

2 The places of Scripture, 1. Tim. 3, 15. Math. 16, 18. Esay 2, 1. Dan. 2, 35. proue not the question. The first place, to wit Math. 16, 18. is expounded by manie interpreters of Christ himselfe, Haimo & Ly­ra super Math. 16. Glesia Gratian. Causa [...]. [...]. 1. cap. Omnibus consid. Super hanc petra id est, Christum. [...]. sup. Ephes. 2. [...]. 20. Super hane petram, id est, su­per me aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. and by the most, of the faith which S. Peter confessed touching Christ. August. d. verb. Dom. Serm. 13. Idem sup. Ioh. [...]. 124. Orig. sup [...]. E [...] Ambr. Epist. 38. [...] in Luc. li. 6. ca 9 [...]. Galath. ca. 1. & sup. Math. Hom. 55. & 83. [...]. d. Trin. li. 2. & 6. Gre­gor. li. 3. Epist. 33. [...] in Ioh. c. 21. The [...] 22. q. 174. ar. 6. Stella in Luc. 9. Concil. Basil. pa. 145. [...] Contr. Schol. 3. And our Sauiour affirmeth not in this Text, that the Ro­man D Church of euerie age is a Rocke; but that the Church of right beleeuers is builded vpon a Rocke, Aug. sup. Psal. 60. vt [...] Ecclesia super petram, qui factus est petra, [...] andi [...], petra [...] erat Christus, in illo ergo aedificati [...]. and so the Church is one thing, and the Rocke another, because nothing is builded vpon it selfe.

The second place 1. Tim. 3, 15. [...], that the Church which is the house of the liuing God is, [...] the pillar and ground of Truth. 1. If by the Church we vnderstand the Catholicke Church, as it containeth the holie Apostles, Occham Dial. li. 1. c. 4. part. 1. Dried. d. Dog Eccles. li. 2. [...]. 58 Generale Concilium Pape, Cardinalium, Episcoporum, Doctorum, in Scripturis propheticis [...], non est [...] authoritatis quantae fucrit [...] Collegium. then this commendation agreeth fully and perfectly to it, in [Page 4] respect of the Apostles, who were led into all Truth, Iohn 16, 13. A and which taught whilest they [...], all Truth, and they do at this present day, in the Scripture, teach the fulnesse of Truth. Aug. sup. Epist. Ioh. tr. 3. Chrys. sup. Ro. Hom. 30. Greg. Mor. l. 18. c. 14. [...]. Offic. l. 1. c. 23. Vincent. Lir. c. Haer. c. 41. 2. If by the Church we vnderstand the Church of Christ, liuing after the Apostles, the same is by office and calling the pillar and ground of Truth in all ages. And some part or other thereof [...] Truth of God [...] to saluati­on. Dried. d. Ec­cles. Dog. li. 2. ca. 3. pa. 58. Glossa Inter­lin. sup. Math. 16. v. 18. Turrecrem. Sum. d. Eccles. li. 2. ca. 91. Alphons. Castro. d. punit. Haer. li. 1. c. 5 But the present Church is not [...] and simply, in all things, the pillar and ground of Truth, but so farre onely as it teacheth the doctrine reuealed by the holie Ghost, and groun­deth her faith vpon the word of God: Lorca. 22ae. Disp. 37. n. 15. Bel­larm. d. verb. Dei li. 4. c. 9. Nihil est de fide nisi quod Deus per Apostolos aut Prophetas reuela­uit. and this is proued, be­cause B the Church Apostolicall was free from all errour, but suc­ceeding Pastors and Doctors may erre in Ecclesiasticall censures, Panormit. in 5. Decret. d. Sent. Excom. ca. 28. Iudi­tium Dei, veritati quae nec fallit nec fallitur semper [...], [...] a­liquandò sequitur [...] quae sae­pèfallit & [...]. in degrees legislatiue, Mych. Medin. d. Rect. in Deum fid. li. 5. c. 11. in sermons, disputations, and other tra­ctats (as our Aduersaries themselues [...]. d. Pon­tif. li. 4. [...]. Carbo. [...]. Theol. li. 4. c. 18 & li. 5. c. 8. Ex [...] Coneilijs [...] illa sunt ni fuerint approbatione [...] munita, nullum [...] omnia hujus generis [...] in omnibus errare possunt. confesse;) and they which propugne the infallible authoritie of the present Church, re­straine the same to the Pope and Councell (of which S. Paul is silent, 1. Tim. 3, 15.) And from hence I inferre, That the Church wherein the Apostles taught and gouerned, was the ground and pillar of Truth, fully, intirely, and in all things: But the present C Church is so, with limitation, conditionally, and so farre forth onely, as it deliuereth the Apostles doctrine. Lastly, the Roman Church can challenge no greater priuiledge of Infallibilitie from this Scripture, than the church of Ephesus, Greg. li. 6. [...]. 37. [...] multisint Apostoli pro ipso tamen principatu sola Apostolorum principis sedes, in authoritate conua­lult, quae in tribus locis [...] est. Ipse enim sublimauit sedem in qua etiam quiescere & presentem vitam finire [...] est. Ipse [...] sedem in qua Euangelistam [...] misit, ipse firmauit sedem in qua septem annis [...] discessurus sedit. Cum ergò vnius atquèvna sit sedes cui ex authoritate diuina tres nunc Episcopi praesidét [...] de vobis boni audio, hoc mihi imputo. of which the Apostle speaketh litterally in the said Text. But although the Church of Ephesus was by office the pillar and ground of Truth, yet the same did afterwards degenerate and depart from the right Faith; which argueth, that particular Churches, such as were the Ro­man, Ephesine, Corinthian, &c. are not in such sort the pillar and ground of Truth, as that they are in no danger of errour Occham Dial. p. 1. li. 2. c. 4. Sancti stante charitate possunt [...] veritatem &c. Error qui [...] non habet, non obuiat sanctitati.. D

The other two places Esay 2, 1. Dan. 2, 35. are principally vn­derstood of Christ Aug. Psalm. 45. Erit in [...] dicbus [...] mons Domini, sed [...] mons super ali­os montes [...]. Quià & Aposto­li montes, portan­tes hunc montem. and his Apostles, and they proue not the Ie­suits position, which is, It is the most important controuersie of all other, to know whether the Roman Church is the true Church; for the present E Church of Rome is a Molehill, and not the Mountaine prophesi­ed of Esay 2. the same filleth not the whole world, but onely a small part of the world; neither did the same antiently, for 500 yeares at the least, fill the whole world, for many people, both in [Page 5] the East and West were Christians, without depending vpon it: A neither is the same alwaies illustrious for Vertue and Truth, but sometimes notorious for Superstition and Vice Francisco Picus Orat. ad. Leo 10. Cerrè exiquus Dei cultus nulla bene viuendi ratio at (que) institutio, nullus pudor, nulla mo­destia, justitia vel in odium vel in gratiam declina­uit, pietas in super­stitioné penè pro­cubuit palamquè in [...] homi­nú ordmibus [...], &c. Sacras aedes & templa Le­nonibus & Cata­mytis commissa quam nesarijs lupis optimi pastoris ouilia demandata &c.. If our Adnersa­ries will contend, That there is in all ages avisible Church, like vnto a great Mountaine filling the whole world, vpon the top whereof standeth the Tradition of all true doctrine, conspicuous and illustrious. 1. The places of Esay and Daniell affirme not this, concerning all times and ages of the Church. 2. The Scrip­tures foretell a large reuolt and apostasie from heauenly trueth 1. Tim 4, 1, 2. 2. Thess. 2, 2.. 3. Our Aduersaries themselues acknowledge, that the outward face of the visible Church, at some times hath beene, and againe B may be, miserably polluted with foule and enormious scandals, and abominations Greg. Vat. 3. pa. 187. Errorum Schysmatum, persecutionum fluctibus ita agitari potest vt imperitis sit [...] difficilis [...] exteriorem pompam habeat. Praefat. O G ad orat. Francise. Pic. Mirandul. Cum infiniti abusus Schysmata quo (que) & Haereses per totum nunc Christianum orbem inualescant. Laurent. Iustinian. d. Compunct. 575. Declinaue­runt prorsus omnes Ecclesiae status: qui spiritualia sunt corporis Christi membra:ex quibus nonnulli alienati sunt ab vtero matris suae, & loquuntur falsa: aliqui verò abierunt retrorsum, carnis defideria sectantes, seipsos aman­tes, & temporalia lucra quaerentes, honorum cupidiscelesti adulteri & miseri. Ista nam (que) vigent, nedum in inferio­ribus, verum etiàm in mediocribus, & sublimioribus membris adeo vt confusa videantur vniuersa vt à planta pe­dis vsque ad verticem capitis, in hoc corpore spiritualis, non appare at sanitas &c. Petrus Leidens. Epist. ad Cle­ment. C 7. antè opera Dionis. Carthus. Quid in Ecclesia non est [...], quid non corruptum, quid non inuer­sum? quid inter Ecclesiasticos integrum hodiè [...] &c.

IESVIT.

If this Church bee ouerthrowne the totall certainetie of Christianitie cannot but with it fall to the ground.

ANSVVER.

The totall certainetie of Christianitie dependeth not vpon a Church illustrious, and conspicuous to the eie of the whole D world, and hauing such externall pompe and Visibilitie as Papals imagine [...]. d. Ec­cles. li. 3 c. 2. Eccle­sia est caetus homi­num ita visibilis & palpabilis, vt est [...] populi Ro­mani, [...] Gal­liae, [...] Respub. [...]. [...] c. Brent. li. 3. pag. 155.. Therefore if such a Church be ouerthrowne, that is, be proued in sundrie Articles to be corrupt and vnfound (which is our Tenet concerning the present Roman Church) the certaintie of Christianitie may still subsist. The Tenet which wee main­taine, touching the qualitie of the present Roman Church, [...] to the reformation of errours, and abuses in the same, and not to the ouerthrowing of the lawfull authoritie of the Visible Church. The certainetie of Religion in the time of the Iewes, did depend as much vpon the authoritie of the Visible Church E of Iuda, as it can in our daies depend vpon the authoritie of the Roman Church, or of any other: for that Church was by office the keeper of the Canonicall Scripture, Rom. 3, 2. the teacher of heauenly trueth, Ezek. 44, 23, Mal. 2, 7. a ministeriall Iudge of con­trouersies, [Page 6] Deut. 17, 9. Ezek. 44, 24. and yet notwithstanding the A said Church was reprooued by the holie Prophets, Mal. 2, 8. 2. Chron. 29.6, 7. Esay 56, 10. Ezek. 34. and the religious kings of Iuda reformed the same, 2. Chron. 14.3, 4. and cap. 17.7, 8, 9. and cap. 29.3. &c. and cap. 34.3, 4. and cap. 33.15. Now like as when a Physition discouereth the diseases of the bodie, and prescri­beth remedies and medecines, he doth thereby heale, and not destroy the state of the bodie; so likewise, they which out of the Oracles of God, haue reuealed the errours and corruptions of the Roman Church, and sought reformation thereof [...] Def. li. d. Offic. [...]. pa. 815. In [...], [...] vni­uersam immeritò [...] multos esse pios viros non minore quam quisquam ipsorum praese serat, reformanda Ecclesiae studio & [...] & superstitionum odio [...]., doe not ouerthrow the certainetie of Christianitie, nor impaire B the lawfull authoritie of the Church, but repaire and establish the same.

IESVIT.

If it be hidden and made inuisible, men must needs wander in the search of the first deliuered Christian Doctrine, with­out C end or hope of euer ariuing at any certaine Issue. And if this Controuersie be not examined and determined in the first place, disputation by Scripture will proue fruitlesse; by the Non ad Scripturas prouocandum nec in eis constituen­dum, certamen in quibus nulla aut parum certa [...], Tertul. in prae­script. ca. 19 sole euidence whereof, no victorie can be gotten against pro­teruious error, or at least not victorie that is verie appa­rant; neither will answers about particular Doctrines satisfie a mind preoccupated with a long continued dislike of them.

ANSVVER. D

In this Section two things are deliuered, First, If the Church be hidden, &c. Secondly: Controuersies cannot be decided by sole Scrip­ture, &c.

To the first I answer, The Church, (that is the societie of Christian people, professing sauing Faith) is at no time totally bidden and inuisible [...] d. [...] in Epist. Dedic. [...] non [...] in se, & [...], vt [...] quoddam est, sed [...] solum, visi­bilem [...] negamus: Et quod hic [...] est [...], id in suis partibus personis, [...], [...] visibile affirma­mus esse. Nec posse [...], [...], & [...], [...]: sed [...] est, sic esse in se, ac inter suos [...] & Antiochi, & aliorum temporibus [...]., but in Persecution, the same may be hidden and vnknowne to them which [...] no will to know it, 2. Cor. 4, 3. or which defire to know it, that they may persecute and oppresse it, Reuelat. 12, 14. E And the same may sometimes cease to be largely, and in a [...] [Page 7] and pompous. manner visible, Math. 10, 23. and 23, 34. A Heb. 11, 38. And in the state of Persecution, when the same is hidden and vnknowne to enemies, the friends of this Church, to whom it is knowne, may by the Ministerie thereof exercised in priuate Acts 1, 13. &c. 12, 12. &c. [...]. Pollidor. d. Inuent. [...] li. 5. c. 6., receiue the certaintie of beleefe: and if it be vnknowne or hidden to any of them, these may by priuat reading, or medi­tation of that which they haue formerly learned, supplie the de­fect of publique Ministerie Occham Dial. li. 5. ca. 34. Fides Cath, Christi pote­rit remanere in Catholicis disper­sis & latitantibus in terris ab infide­libus occupatis &c. Turrian. 22. Disp. 2. Dub. 4. Conditio aliquandò non est immediata propo­sitio per Ecclesiam sed vel per Conci­onatorem vel pa­rentes, qui docent filios., euen as some Christians at this day, being slaues in Turkie or Barbarie, may be saued without ex­ternall Ministerie. And it is also possible for such to be Instru­ments of conuerting and sauing others Acost. d. Proc. Ind. Sal. lib. 2. ca. 9. Ecclesiasticae histo­riae narrant tem­pore Constantini magni, totam Ibe­riam prouinciam quae est Armeniae proxima Christia­nae mulieris capti­uae opera & signis ad Christum esse conuersam., Ruffin. Hist. Eccles. li. 1. B c. 9, & 10. Besides, we do also acknowledge, that the Popish Church, although it were corrupt and vnsound in many things, yet it preserued the Bookes of holie Scripture, and taught the Apostles Creed, and sundrie parts of Diuine veritie collected from the same Libauius c. Gretser. Triumph. c. 13. pa. 103. mansit aliqua lux verbi Dei vt Euangelij lectiones, Symbola, Oratio Dominica & Baptismi sub­stantialia &c. Gomar. Spec. ver. Eccles. pa. 201. Compertum est etiam nunquam in Papatu tam densas [...] D tenebras, quin aliqua fuerit publica in templis Euangelij lectio, & promissionum Euangelij pro concione quam­uis adjunctis erroribus repetitio & [...] non [...] mirandum complures Dei spiritu adjunante ad [...] fidem praeteritis quasi surda aure expositionum vestrarum corruptelis Euangelij voce conuersos.: and by these Principles of Christianitie pre­serued in that Church, iuditious and pious men might with stu­die and diligence find out, what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine, in such things as are necessarie to Saluation; as in the Iewish Church, when the same was corrupt in manners and do­ctrine, Mal. 2, 8. Esay 56, 10. 2. Kings 16, 11, 16. Marc. 6, 34. C the Bookes of holie Scripture, and many remnants of Diuine truth (which were able to saue Gods elect) remained and were sufficient Principles, from whence all sauing truth might be deri­ued Hieron. Sup. Nah. cap. 3. In aduentu ergo Christi & Sermonis Dei & Doctrinae [...] & consummationis Niniue spe­ciocissimae quondam meritricis: eleuabitur & properabit [...], qui sub magistris ante fuerat consopitus, & ibit and montes Scripturarum: ibi (que) inueniet Montes Moysen, & Iesum filium Naue Montes Prophetas, Montes Noui Testamenti Apostolos & Euangelistas, & cum ad tales Montes confugerit & in hujusmodi montium fuerir lectione versatus si non inuenerit qui eum doceat, messis enim multa operarij autem pauci tunc & illius studium comprobabitur [...] confugerit ad Montes & Magistrorum defidia coarguetur. Espenc. Com. in Epist. Tit. c. 2. pa. 259. Nonne videtur tum Propheta, tum interpres nostri [...], & Pastorum filentium ne [...] ignauiam & populi ante cum eis consopiti, quasi è graui somno excitati studium & ad Sctipturas tum audiendas tum legen­das [...] alacritatem praedicere & quasi digito indicare., and pernitious errours and abuses discouered and refor­med. And thus although the true Church be granted at some­times to be hidden and inuisible, in manner before expressed, well affected people shall not want all meanes to vnderstand what was the first deliuered Christian faith.

The Iesuit in the next passage laboureth to make it appeare E impossible, to end and determine Controuersies of Religion, without the authoritie of a perpetuall visible Church, whose iudgement is alwaies infallible, and free from all error. But if his speech be resolued from a Rhethoricall flourish, into forme of [Page 8] Argument, the loosenesse of it will appeare. For he proceedeth A in this or the like manner:

IESVIT.

By all such meanes as is of it selfe sufficient to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine apparant, victorie may be gotten against proteruious errour, and minds preoccupated with long dislike of particular Doctrines may be satisfied. By sole Scripture no apparant victorie can B be gotten against proteruious errour, neither can long dislike of particular Doctrines be satisfied: Ergo, sole Scripture is not a sufficient meanes to declare what was the first deliue­red Christian Doctrine.

ANSVVER.

First, If by apparant Victorie, be meant such Victorie, as proteruious errants will confesse, or persuade themselues to C bee a Victorie against them, then the Maior Proposition is false. For when our Sauiour himselfe confuted the Pharisees, by such demonstration as none could be greater, yet they resisted the Truth, and in like sort they resisted S t. Stephen, Acts 7, 53. and S. Paul, Acts 28, 23. and in the best Councels of Nice, Ephe­sus, &c. no such apparant Victorie was gotten of proteruious Heretiques Euseb. vit. Con­stant. lib. 2. c. 71. [...] Socrat. Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 6. [...]. D.

Secondly, If by apparant Victorie, be meant a true and suffi­cient confutation and conuiction of Errants, then the Minor is false; for that is a sufficient means to obtaine Victorie, by which our Sauiour himselfe subdued Sathan, Math. 4.4, 7. and the Here­tiques of his time, Math. 12, 3. & 22, 29, 43. and by which S t. Paul confuted the Pharisees, and other Aduersaries, Acts 17, 2. and 28, 23. And whereby the Fathers of the Nicene Councell conuicted the Arrians [...] Dial. p. 3 tr. 1. lib. 3. ca. 6. [...]. Cyzicen. in Acta. Concil. Ni­cen. pa. 2., Socrat. Hist. l. 1. c. 6. Exquifitis le­gis diuinae testimonijs. Dist. 15. c. 1. [...]. and which are giuen by inspira­tion to be an effectuall meanes to reprooue and confute error, 2. E Tim. 3, 16. Chrys. d. fid. & leg. nat Quandò haec dicit Haereticus nos à Sancta Scriptura [...] proferamus [...] enim [...] in [...] inimicorum Regis [...]. [...] Orgelit. in Cantic. [...] hac Sancta Scriptura omnis armatura [...]. [...]. [...]. d. Diu. Nom. c. [...]. Nos [...] Scriptura, quasi nor­ma & luce adhibita, constanter ad [...] nostra, pro [...] parte [...].. But the Iesuit may cauil, saying, [Page 9] that euen as a sword in the hand of a Giant, is sufficient to [...] A an enemie, but not in the hand of a child who cannot vse it; so the Scriptures are a meanes to conuict proteruious [...], as they were vsed by Christ and his Apostles, and by the [...] Councels or Papall Councels, and the Bishops and Doctors of the Roman Church, &c.

Answ. First, Our Sauiour and his Apostles did both vse the Scriptures themselues, and commanded others, euen simple men to vse them Chrys. Gen. [...]. 37. Christus praecepit dioens scrutemini Scrip­turas, vt nòn tan­tùm [...] lectioni vacemus sed inda­gatis profundis, ve­rum sensum [...] percipere vale­amus, &c., Iohn 5, 39. Ephes. 6, 17. and they are commended who examined Doctrine by them. Acts 17, 11. B

Secondly, they which vnderstand and applie the Scriptures truely, vse them as Christ and his Apostles did, and so the Scrip­ture in their vse is a word of power, and not as a sword in a childs hand.

Thirdly, Scriptures were meanes to conuict Hereticks (as they were vsed by the Fathers of the Church, and other holie Per­sons) before any generall Councells were gathered, to wit the first three hundred yeares, and before the Papall Supremacie was aduanced in the Church.

Fourthly, it is ridiculous to imagine, that the present Roman C Church, and the sole Adheres thereof, according to the Trident Creed, are the only true expositors of holy Scriptures; or that [...] exposition of Scripture, repugnant and diuers from the present Roman Creed, is false or Haereticall: for neither hath the holie Ghost by expresse testimonie, or euident demonstration, appropriated the key of knowledge to this Church, and few He­retickes haue more fouly corrupted and abused the Scriptures. And the pillars of this Church [...] sundrie times been vnskil­full Ideots, vnlettered Gulls, Monsters of mankind, with whom D the holie Spirit vseth not to haue commerce Francisc. Pic. Theo. 18. Persuasissi­mum nobis esse de­bet [...] modò eos qui Doctiores, sed & [...] sunt clarius & exquisitius caeteris, veritatem agnoscere & agnitam [...] &c. Quis enim ambigat, [...] hominem [...] committere, quem probatae perspectaeque [...], quam qui bonitatis expers aut indigus, doctrina [...] pollet. Et D. Ambros. de paradiso [...]: nemi­nem debere se alteri credere, nisi [...] virtutem probauerit., Wisdom. 1. 2. Cor. 6. 15.

Fiftly, the place of Tertul. d. Praescript. c. 19. doth not [...] the imperfection of holie Scripture to conuict proteruious er­ror, according to the latter part of my former distinction; for then he could not haue said, Scripturae plenitudinem adoramus; We E adore the plenitude of the [...], and, Let Hermogenes teach Tert. cont. [...]. cap. 22. [...] Hermogenes scrip­tum esse, si non est scriptum timeat [...] illud, adijcientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum., that it is written: and if it be not written, let him feare the Wo denounced against them which add or detract any thing from the word of God: but be [...] of the Scriptures, according to the first part of my distinction, to wit, That Heretickes blinded with malice, [Page 10] and either denying or corrupting the text [...] Cum ex Scripturis [...] in accusatio­nem [...] ipsarum Scriptura­rum quafi non rectè se habeant, nequè fint ex au­thoritate &c. Iren. li. 3. ca. 2. of the Scriptures, A Tertul. d. Prae­script. c. 17. Ista Hae­tefis non recipit quasdam Scriptu­ras: Et si quas re­cipit adiectionibus & detractionibus ad [...] instituti sui [...], & fi recipit non recipit inte­gras & si aliqua te­nùs integras prae­stat, nihilomin' di­uersas expositiones commentata conuertit. cannot be so conuicted by them, but they will still vse cauils, and by Sophisticall slights borrowed from Philosophers Tertul. d. Praescr. c. 7. & C. Marc. li. 5. c. 19. Chrys. prol. sup. 1. Corinth. Hieron. sup. Esa. c. 19. & [...]. sup. Daniel. elude the euidence of the plaine Texts of Scriptures. But if this argue the Scriptures of imperfection, it will also prooue the Authori­tie of the Church, and of Tradition, to be insufficient, as ap­peares in the Arrians and Donatists. And Heretickes may with no lesse pretext, take exception against Tradition, and Ecclesiasti­call Authoritie, than against the Scripture, Ireneus li. 3. ca. 2. When they are confuted by Scriptures, they accuse them as being not well writ­ten, and destitute of Authoritie, or else so ambiguous that one cannot B find the Truth by them &c. And in like manner when we prouoke them to stand to triall by Tradition, which came from the Apostles Cum autem ad eam iterum Traditionem, quae est ab Apostolis quae per successiones pres­biterorum in Ecclesus custoditur, prouocamus eos, aduersantur Traditioni. &c. they oppose the same &c. And thus they will consent neither to Scrip­ture nor Tradition Euenit itaque nequè Scriptu­ris iam nequè Traditioni eos consentire.. And Gregorie Valence Greg. val. [...]. 3. Disp. 1. p. 1. pa. 36. Reuelatio diuina & propositio C infallibilis Ecclesiae, non minus obscura nobis est quam quilibet alius Articulus fidei credendus. himselfe saith, The in­fallible teaching and proposition of the Church is no lesse obscure vnto vs than any other Article which we are to beleeue.

Sixtly, we acknowledge the lawfull Power and Authoritie of the Church Caluin Insti­tut. li. 4. c. 1. num. 10. Whitak. Duplic. li. 1. c. 9. Christi Eccle­siam summa vene­ratione prosequi­mur, & authoritatem Ecclesie libenter amplectimur: & [...] Christianum nunquam esse arbitrabor, qui testimonium & iuditium Ecclesiae nihili fecerit., about expounding holy Scriptures, and for main­taining Vnitie in right Faith, and appeasing contention, & repres­sing proteruious Errants, Heb. 13.17. Math. 18.17.1. Timoth. 3.15. 2. Thessal. 5.12.

And in particular, first wee beleeue the authority of Councels D General and Nationall, lawfully assembled, and accordingly pro­ceeding, to be sacred. [...]. [...]. Fid. 2d Gra­tian. [...]. Hist. Eccles. l. 1. c. 7. So­crat. Hist. Eccles. l. 1. c. 6. Greg. lib. 1. Ep. 24. [...] Walden. to. 1. li. 2. c. 20. De quatuor conciliis magnis quod Gregorius ea videtur comparare [...], non autem comparar sed similitudi­nem quandam insinuat [...] in Enangelio Christus, [...] perfectificut [...] vester coelest. Matth. 5. And all Councels of this nature we reue­rence with the same honour the ancient Church did, [...]. d. Bapt. l. 1. c. 7. &c. 18. & l. 2. c. 8. D. Andr. C. Apolog. Bellarm. c. 14. Date nobis [...] legitimè congregata & pro­cedentia E in corum sententiam imus statim. Occham. Dialog. part. 3. l. 3. c. 13. affirming that priuate Christians and particular Churches, are to submit their iudgement to the authority of the same, except it bee mani­fest that they depart from Truth.

Secondly, wee highly and reuerently esteeme exposition of Scripture, deliuered by the vnanimous consent of the Prima­tiue [Page 11] Fathers [...]. Epist. ad Micon. Chemnic. Examin. Concil. Trid. part. 1. pag. 78. Caluin. Commentar. Act. 8. ver. 31. Praefat. to BB. Iewells workes last edit. D. Andr. BB. Winch. c. Apo­log. Belarm. c. 14. pa. 333. [...] Respon. ad Perion. pa. 20. [...]. d. Colloq. Ratisbon. pa. 182. Herbrand. Disp. 41. n. 16. Meisuer. Excub. pa. 43.: and although wee yeeld eminent and supreme Au­thoritie A to the holy Scriptures Serran. Apparat. ad Fid. Cath. Summa quidem Dei eiusquè Scripturae authoritas est: verum sua quoquè Ecclesiae iurisdictio, constat sua authoritas., because the same is absolutely diuine, yet when any question ariseth concerning Expositions, we allow not priuate persons D. Bilson. Gouern. of the Church, ca. 13. pa. 280. Meisner. Excub. Papist. pa. 175. Si omnes ab Apostolis per omnia secula patres primarium quoddam & maximè controuersum Scripturae dictum in quo articulus aliquis fidei Christianae fundatur [...] modo adeoquè pleno & vnanimi conseusu exposuerint, tùm sanè ab ista conformi patrum expositione, non est recedendum, meritoquè suspectus esse debet omnis ille sensus, qui tanto patrum consensui directo opponitur. vpon vncertaine or probable rea­sons, to reiect the sence, which hath bin antiently and commonly receiued, and against which no strong or solid exception can be produced. Now this being obserued, and other helps of ex­pounding Scripture vsed, there followeth nothing from our Te­net, whereby Christianitie should be made vncertaine, and Dis­putation from sole Scripture prooue fruitles, or which may hin­der apparent Victorie (by the same) against proteruious Error. B

IESVIT.

The Preface ended, our Aduersarie descendeth to his disputation, and herein, first he setteth downe a maine propo­sition, C which hee intendeth to prooue, to wit, The Roman Church is the onely true Church.

Secondly, He deliuereth fiue Principles manifest in them­selues, and presupposed and confessed by Papists and Pro­testants.

Principle 1. No man can be saued without firme and sure appre­hension of supernaturall Truth, concerning his last end, and the meanes to D attaine thereunto.

Secondly, Assurance of this kind is not had by cleere sight Demonstration, humane Discourse, or humane Authoritie, but by Faith grounded vpon Gods Word, reuealing things vnknowne by other meanes.

Thirdly, God reuealed all Supernaturall Truth to Christ, and Christ reuealed the same to the holy Apostles, partly by vocall Prea­ching, but principally by the immediate teaching of his holy Spirit, to this end, that they should deliuer them to mankind, to bee recei­ued and beleeued euerie where ouer the World, euen to the consummation E thereof.

Fourthly, the Apostles fulfilled this preaching to all Nations, and deliuering partly by writing, and partly by word of mouth, the whole entire Doctrine of Saluation; planted an vniuersall Christian com­panie [Page 12] [...], and to deliuer vn­to A [...], all they had [...] from them.

Fiftly, though the Apostles and their Primatiue Hearers be deceased, yet there still remaines in the World a meanes, by which men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached, andthe Prima­tiue Church receiued of them, because the Church, euen to the endof the World, must be founded on the Apostles, and beleeue nothing as matter of Faith, but that which was deliuered by them.

The former grounds being confessed, a question remaineth to be exa­mined: What is the principall infallible meanes whereby a Christian may B know what was, and is the Doctrine of Faith, originally preached by the Apostles, Whether holy Scripture of the Apostles and Euangelists bee that meanes, or perpetuall Tradition vnwritten, deriued by Succession from the Apostles?

ANSVVER.

The Iesuit affirmeth the latter, and produceth foure Argu­ments to prooue his Tenet; and then supposing that he hath prooued the Question, inferreth that the Roman Church is the only true Church, because it is the only faithfull keeper and C teacher of this Tradition.

IESVITS 1. Argument.

If the maine and substantiall points of our Faith are beleeued to bee Apostolicall, because written in the Scrip­ture of the New Testament, and the Scriptures of the New Testament are beleeued to come from the Apostles, vp­on the voice of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten; then our D resolution, That our Faith is Apostolicall, stayeth finally vp­on Tradition vnwritten.

But the maine and substantiall points of our Faith are beleeued to be Apostolicall, because they are written in Scrip­tures, and the Scriptures &c. are beleeued to come from the Apostles by perpetuall Tradition vnwritten.

Ergo, Our resolution that our Faith is Apostolicall, re­steth finally vpon Tradition vnwritten. E

ANSVVER.

If the second part of the Antecedent, to wit, And the Scrip­tures of the new Testament, are beleeued to come from the Apostles [Page 13] vpon the [...] of [...] Tradition vnwritten, bee vnderstood A without any further explication or addition, then the sequell of the Maior is denied: and if onely, or principally, bee added to vn­written Tradition, then the Assumption is false.

First, although the Scriptures of the new Testament, are be­leeued to come from the Apostles, vpon the voyce of perpetuall Tradition, yet because they are not beleeued thus to descend by the said voyce, as vpon the onely or principall ground, therefore it is inconsequent to inferre, our resolution that our faith is Apo­stolicall, stayeth lastly and finally vpon Tradition.

If the Argument be reduced to a Categoricall forme, the de­fect B will easily appeare:

That vpon whose voyce the Scriptures of the new Testament are beleeued to come from the Apostles, is the grouud whereupon our faith lastly and finally stayeth.

Perpetuall Tradition, is that vpon whose voyce the Scriptures of the new Testament are beleeued to come from the Apostles.

Therefore perpetuall Tradition is the ground C whereupon our faith lastly and finally stayeth.

In this Argument the Maior proposition is false, for that is not alwayes the last ground of Resolution, vpon whose voyce and testimony we doe first of all, or prioritate or dinis, vel temporis, in priority of time, or order, beleeue things: because there may be other grounds of beleefe, equall, or of greater authoritie than the first voyce; and the first voyce vpon which we beleeue [...]. d. [...]. Cred. c. 16. [...] sapienti quis [...] sed id nunc [...] vt sapientes [...]. [...] d. Sacr. Doct. & Deo. l. 1. tr. 2. c. 1. [...] d. fid. form. Disp. 3. Sect. 12. n. 13. [...] potest ex humana authoritate generari quandam fidem humanam, praeuiam ad fidem infusam, non tanquam fundamentum vel rationem formalem eius, sed tanquá E conditionem, & applicationem obiecti. p. 135., may be only an introduction or motiue of credibility. For example: One may beleeue that Moses or the Prophets were the Au­thors D of the Scriptures of the old Testament, vpon the voyce and testimony of the Iewes, yet this testimony is not the last ground of resolution, &c. One may beleeue vpon the testimony of Iose­phus, Joseph. Antiq. Iud. l. 18. c. 4. [...]. That Iesus Christ was a wise man, yea more than a man, and that hee wrought many great miracles, and was crucified, and appeared againe the third day aliue, and was honoured by Iewes and Gentiles: yet this voyce and Testimony of Iosephus is not the finall ground of faiths resolution. [Page 14] If [...] bee taken to these [...], that they proceed A [...] from humane [...], whereas the voyce of [...] is [...]; I [...] ere two things.

First, that the [...] and [...] of faith, is not alwayes made into that [...], vpon whose voyce and [...] [...] as appeareth by S t. Iohn Baptist, for [...] vpon his voyce and [...], which did not finally and principally [...] their [...] his [...], but into the voyce of Christ him­selfe, Iohn 5. 33, 36.

Secondly, although the vocall Tradition of the Apostles B themselues, concerning the Scriptures of the new Testament, when they deliuered or commended the same Euseb. Eccles. Hist. l. 3. c. 21. Cum trium Euangelista­rum Scripta ad san­ctos iam, & ad ip­sum quoque Iohan­ne [...] pro­basse quidem [...], & veritatis illis de­disse testimonium. to their imme­diate hearers, was totally and perfectly diuine, both in regard of the matter testified, and in respect of their owne persons who were witnesses immediatly sent and inspired of God; yet the subsequent History, and report of this former, made by those which were remote from the Apostles age, is not simply and per­fectly diuine, but onely in part, for when it faithfully reporteth that which the Apostles said and did, it is diuine in regard of the matter and thing testified, but is humane Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. Fid. vol. 3. Dub. 10. c. 9. Comparatione buius (Scripturae) testimo­nium Ecclesiae dici quodammodo potest testimonium bomi­num vtpote quod in rigore sermonis non obtineat [...] & [...] ad rationem verbi Dei. pag 55. col. 2. in regard of the quality C of the witnesses, and the manner of testification, because these suc­ceeding witnesses were not equall in verity to the holy Apostles, [...] free from possibility of errour, nor such as immediatly heard the Apostles. Hereupon Aquinas himselfe holdeth, [...]. l. 12. c. 3. [...] that our faith doth onely rest vpon those reuelations which the Authours of the holy Scriptures published: and Durand [...] with many other Schoole­men [...] saith, that the faith which is grounded vpon the approba­tion of the Church is onely acquisite. [...]. 22. q. 1. Disput. 2. Dub. 3. Fides acquisita semper resoluitur in [...] bumanum. Canus. loc. l. 2. c. 8. [...] per fidem acquisitam ita [...] quin formidemus eum possevel [...] vel [...]. [...]. Picus Mirandul. Theorem. 3. [...] sub esse potest [...] non [...], Deo [...], sed E [...]. And if this be true, then because the credit of vnwritten Traditions, dependeth in respect of vs, vpon the authority of the Church since the Apostles, D (which Churches voyce being not formally diuine, can of it selfe onely produce acquisite faith) the last and finall resolution of di­uine faith, cannot bee made into the voyce of Tradition vnwrit­ten. And thus much concerning the sequel of the Maior pro­position.

But if the Iesuite, when he saith, the Scriptures of the new Testa­ment are beleeued to come from the Apostles, vpon the voyce of perpetu­all Tradition vnwritten, doe means that the said Scriptures are beleeued [Page 15] to [...] from the Apostles, vpon the voyce of vnwritten Tradition, A [...], then the assumption is false: for they are [...] to come from the Apostles by written Tradition, as well as by vnwritten, and more principally vpon the voyce of the A­postles, speaking in and by their Scriptures, than vpon the onely testimony of vnwritten Tradition.

It is vsuall and common for one man to certifie another, of such matters as he desireth he should know, by an Epistle or wri­ting: So likewise the holy Apostles desiring [...] that all the world, for whose instruction they wrote, should know that these Scrip­tures are their worke, haue declared the same by their owne testi­monie, B recorded in those bookes. S t. Iohn affirmes, that hee is the Author of his Gospell, and of the Reuelation, Iohn 21, 24. Reuel. 1, 4. S t. Paul and other Apostles doe the like concerning the Epistles, Rom. 1, 1. 2. Cor. 10, 10. Collos. 4. 18. 1. Pet. 1, 1. Iam. 1, 1. Iude v. 1. And that the holy Apostles and Euangelists doe speake vnto people of all ages by their bookes and writings, is affirmed by the Fathers: S t. August. saith, [...] Ipsum Paulum audi, &c. Heare thou, euen Paul himselfe. S t. Chrysost. [...] If thou desirest, thou mayest heare Paul, Peter, Iohn, and the whole company of the Prophets speaking vnto thee, take the bookes of these blessed ones into thine hands, reade their C Scriptures, and thou mayest heare, not Paul onely, but euen Pauls Lord speaking vnto thee by Pauls mouth.

But it is obiected against this, by Bellarmine and others, [...] that counterfeit Authours may speake in the name and person of the Apostles; to wit, a Bastard Hereticke, in the name of S t. Bartho­lomew, or S t. Peter, &c.

I answere with S t. Augustine, [...] E the same may be done in all hu­mane, and ecclesiasticall writings, and yet sufficient meanes are found, partly in the History of times, partly in the writings of euery Authour, to confute Impostors. And concerning the holy D Scriptures, wee haue two meanes to know their Authours: the one Ecclesiasticall, to wit, the perpetuall History of the Church, since the Apostles departure, [...] whereby is produced a morall persuasion and credibilitie, than which none can bee greater in that kinde, by reason of the antiquity, number, consent, and sanctitie of the witnesses which testifie this: the other totally di­uine, [...] to wit, the matter, and forme of Doctrine contained in the [Page 16] [...] the said bookes to be [...] A and if they be [...] can speake in them. And that [...] within those bookes, is affirmed by the [...] [...] Among which [...] [...] are taken from the in­ternall 1. [...]. Prol. ar. 2. Ibid. Giner. pa. 9. [...]. ab Incarnat. Lect. 3. p. 20. Polla. sup. Scot. q. 2. dis­curs. 2. p. 14. matter and maiesty of the bookes; and Gregory Valence [...] [...] contained in the same Scripture, &c. And [...] [...] [...], that the [...] of God is seene by faith in the holy [...] [...] faith, The Scripture is a faire [...] [...]. [...]. [...] [...] You haue before B [...], 2. Pet. 1. 19. And [...] August. [...] C [...]. And therefore, as a [...] or [...] others, by the same light or [...] manifests it selfe [...]: so the holy Scripture inlightning the Church, demonstrates his owne [...] and vertue. And thus [...] we be first directed and holpen by vnwritten Tradition to know the Scriptures, yet the Tradition of the present Church, is [...] the onely last and principall ground whereunto we resolue [...].

If the Iesuits Argument be retorted vpon himselfe, it will demonstrate, that our Faith is finally resolued into holy Scrip­ture, D and not into vnwritten Tradition [...] E; for inuerting [...] order of the [...], and retaining the matter, I argue as followeth.

If the maine and [...] points of Faith are [...] to be [...], because of the [...] of perpetuall Tradition [Page 17] vnwritten, and [...] Tradition vnwritten is beleeued to A be Apostolicall, because of the authoritie of the Scripture; then our resolution, that our Faith is Apostolicall, resteth finally vp­on the Scripture.

But the Antecedent is true, Ergo &c.

The Assumption is confirmed two waies.

First, by the practise of Papals which confirme their doctrine of Tradition, by testimonies of Scripture, alledging, 2. Thess. 2. 15. 1. Tim. 6. 20. & 2. Tim. 1. 16.

Secondly, because the credit of Tradition, in respect of vs, dependeth vpon the authoritie of the Church, and the authori­tie B of the Church vpon the Scriptures.

Both these assertions are maintained by the Papals. First, They say that the authoritie of Tradition, in respect of vs, de­pendeth vpon the Church. Gretsar. Si [...] vnde cognoscat propositionem Ec­clesiae esse infalli­bilem, dicat se, &c. credere fide infalli­bili, tùm ob reuela­tionem Scripturae testimonium per­hibentis Ecclesiae, &c. def. Bellarm. d. verbo Dei, lib. 4. cap. 9. Vitus miletus cont. [...]. loc. 27. Error. 615. Se­condly, They confirme the Churches authoritie by the Scrip­tures, 1. Tim. 3.15. Math. 18.17. Eph. 4. 11, 12, 13, 14. Gregorie Valence tom. 3. disput. 1. punct. 1. pa. 40. & ibid. punct. 7. pa. 327. Dri­edo. Dried. d. Ec­cles. Dcgm. l. 4. part. 3. c. 4. De Ecclesia [...] nùnc est intel­ligendo eam vt praecisam & ab­stractam seu nu­dam, &c. diceret Aug. Ego huius Ec­clesiae homines non agnoscerem esse Ecclesiam Chri­sti, nisi doceret me [...] Euangelistarum authoritas. fol. 239. d. Eccles. dogm. li, 2. c. 3. pa. 59. Stapleton [...]. Tripl. c. 15. [...] vt Ecclesiae credamus, nòn [...] authoritate [...] & [...] ( [...] in genere causae [...]) huius fidei no­strae causa: sed partìm ex Scripturis [...] ad Ecclesiae [...], partìm ex ipso fi­dei Symbolo &c. triplic. c. 15. pa. 179. And thus will they nill they, they are compelled to make holie C Scripture the last and finall resolution of Faith: for if we be­leeue Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church, and the Churches authoritie for the Scripture, then we must of [...] make the Scripture our last and finall resolution of [...] which is the Tenet of the Fathers. S. Chris. sup. Psal. 95. Si quid dicitur absque Scriptura, auditorum cogitatio [...], [...] annuens, nunc [...], & [...], vt [...], interdùm vt [...], [...] vbi è Scriptura diui­nae vocis prodijt testimonium, & loquentis sermonem, & [...]. August. sup. Psalm. 67. Dormire intèr medios cleros est in [...] Testamenti authoritate [...], vt quandò aliquid ex hijs [...]. When any thing is deliuered without the warrant of Scripture, the hearers thought staggereth, sometimes consenting, and then againe [...], and another while reiecting the same as [...], &c. but when the te­stimonie of Diuine Voice is deliuered out of the Scripture, it both con­firmeth the saying of the Speaker, and mind of the Hearer. D

IESVIT. E

So it is, that the Scripture of the New Testament [...] not be prooued to haue beene deliuered vnto the Church by the Apostles, but by perpetuall Tradition vnderwritten, [Page 18] conserued in the Church succeeding the Apostles: for what A other proofe can be imagined, except one would prooue it by the titles of the Bookes, which were absurd, seeing doubt may be made, Whether those titles were set on the Bookes by the Apostles themselues; of which doubt Tradition only can re­solue vs. Besides, the Gospell of S. Marke, and S. Luke, and also the Acts of the Apostles were not written by any Apostles, but were by their liuely voice and suffrages recommended vnto Christians as sacred, otherwise (as also M r. Bilson B noteth) they should neuer haue obtained such eminent autho­ritie in the Church, neither should they be now so esteemed, but vpon the supposall of Apostolicall approbation: but how shall we know the Apostles saw these writings, and recom­mended the same vnto Christian Chnrches, but by Tra­dition?

ANSVVER.

The point which the Aduersarie endeauors to prooue, is, That C the Scriptures of the New Testament are beleeued, by diuine Faith, to come from the Apostles, only and principally by the testimonie of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten: he endeauoreth to performe this by disproouing other meanes, to wit, the titles of the Bookes, &c.

The summe of his argument is,

Either perpetuall Tradition vnwritten, is the only ground of this beleefe, or else the Titles of the Bookes.

But the Titles of the Bookes are not the only ground, because doubt D may be made of their credit, &c. And some of the Bookes of the New Testament were not penned by the Apostles, but by their Suffrages re­commended to Christians, and so became Authenticall in the Church. And this approbation is not expressed in the Titles of the Bookes, but is on­ly made knowne by Tradition.

I answere: It followeth not that Tradition vnwritten is the Oreg. Arimin. 1. d. z. q. 1. Ar. 4. Merè credendū est, quod contenta in sa­cra Scriptura suc­runt à Christo re­uclata. Per nullam enim viam hoc sci­mus, nisi quia hoc credit Ecclesia, & sic audiuimus à patribus nostris, & sic in praedicta Scriptura [...]. only or principall ground whereupon we beleeue the Scriptures of the New Testament to be Apostolicall, although the titles of the Bookes alone are not so; for besides the externall Titles, E there be three other grounds, arguing the said Books to be Apo­stolicall.

[Page 19] First, the inward Subscription (1. Corinth. 16.21. and In­scription, A [...]. 1. Rom. 1. 1.) of many of these Bookes, and namely of all Saint Pauls Epistles (except to the Hebrews Chrysoft. sup. Rom. Hom. 1. Quod autèm in Epistola quae ad Hebraeos est hunc Epistola­ré adiungendi no­minis modum non seruauit singulari factum est pruden­dentia. Quando­quidem enim He­braei non erant a­mico erga paulum animo, ne statim à principio nomen illius audientes, to­ti Epistolae aditum praecluderent, sa­pientèr illi visum est suppresso autho­ris nomine illorum allicere auditum.) together with the Reuelations of Saint Iohn, and the other Canonicall Epistles.

Secondly, In diuers Bookes there is found apparant testimonie, within the same, that the Apostles were the Authors, Iohn 21. 24. 1. Cor. 15. 10. 1. Tim. 1. 13. Renel. 1. 4.

Thirdly, In those Bookes which want such inward inscription or testimonie, the matter and forme of the Bookes, their harmo­nie B with the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and with those other of the New Testament, which haue inscription, and the voice of the holy Ghost speaking in them Aug. Epist. 3. quasi amicus fami­liaris sine fuco ad cor loquitur docto­rū & indoctorum. Serranus, Appar. ad fid. Catholic. pa. 51. Ea vis est Scriptu­rae à Deo inspira­tae, vt Dei majestas in ca eluceat. Etpa. 55. Lux sua se vi, ipsam prodit., will prooue them to be diuine: and if they be diuine, then it followeth, that they are Apostolicall (either by the Apostles owne writing, or ap­probation) because the Church of the New Testament is buil­ded vpon the foundation of the Apostles, Eph. 2. 20. and our Sauiour himselfe did appoint their Doctrine and Ministerie to be the prime rule of Faith, Math. 28. 20. Luc. 10. 16. & c. 24. 48, 49. And whosoeuer in their daies (by preaching, or writing) in­structed C the Church, must receiue approbation from them Aug. c. Faust. li. 28. c. 4. [...]. A­polog. Aug. Ep. 11. Ireneus lib. 3. prol. Prosola vera & vi­uifica fide quam ab Apostolis Ecclesiae accepit & distribu­it filijs suis. Etenim Dominus [...] dedit Apostolis suis potestatem Euan­gelij per quos veritatem hoc est filij doctrinam [...], &c. 228., Gal­lath. 2. 2. 9.

The titles prefixed before the Bookes of the New Testament, being ioined with these three grounds formerly expressed, are sufficient to prooue, that the holy Apostles were the Authors, or Approuers of all the Scriptures of the New Testament: and if these (with other humane motiues of credibilitie) be not, the same doubt which is made concerning them, may with greater probabilitie be made concerning vnwritten Traditions Greg. Val. Analis. fid. li. 5 c. 8. Read be­fore pag. 28.. And secluding the authoritie of the Scripture it selfe, no other diuine D testimonie can be produced, to satisfie them which are doubt­full, touching the veritie of vnwritten Tradition, and the autho­ritie of the present Church. If one will not beleeue the Scrip­tures, because of the authoritie of God [...]. d. Lazaro. hom. 4. [...] E. [...] com. Theol. li. 1. tr. 7. ca. 2. n. 3. itaque qui de hoc Canone [...], excludendus à Theologia, quià aberrat ab ostio, ficut ij qui in scientijs negant principia. speaking in them, nei­ther will he beleeue the present Church consisting of persons, in whom is possibilitie of error.

IESVIT. A

For we may distinguish three properties of the Doctrine of Faith, to wit, to be true, to be reuealed of God, to be prea­ched and deliuered by the Apostles. The highest ground by which I am persuaded and resolued that my Faith is true, is the authoritie of God reuealing it; the highest ground on which I am resolued that my Faith is reuealed, is the credit and authoritie of Christ Iesus and his Apostles, who deliuered B the same as diuine and sacred; but the highest ground that mooueth me to beleeue that my Faith was preached by the Apostles, is the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succee­ding the Apostles, that so teacheth me.

ANSVVER.

The last part of the former distinction is denied. The highest ground meaning diuine, which mooueth vs to beleeue that the C doctrine of Faith was preached by the Apostles, is not the perpe­tuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles, but the holy Scripture of the New Testament; for the perpetuall Tra­dition of the Church succeeding the Apostles is beleeued, be­cause of the authoritie of the said Church: and whosoeuer be­leeueth that Tradition or Testimonie, must first of all know the Church to be an infallible witnesse. But the word of God only (the greater and most worthie part whereof, by our Aduersaries confession, is contained in the Scriptures [...]. d. Vet­bo Dei l. 1. c. 2. Cum sacra Scriptura re­gula credendi cer­tissima [...] fit. Lib. 4. c. 11. Dico illa omnia scripta esse ab Apostolis quae sunt omnibus necessaria & quae ipsi palam omnibus vulgo praedicanetunt. Idem. Clarissima testimonia Scripturae anteponenda sunt omnibus conciliorum [...].) giueth authoritie to the Church, for the Church is founded vpon the word of God, D Eph. 2.20. and the word of God is the immortall seed which produceth and giueth being to the Church Gregor. Valenc. tom. 3. q. 1. disp. 1. punct. 7. pa. 194. Aug. li. d. pastor. c. 13. & Ep. 48. & Epist. 166. & d. vnit. Ec­clesiae c. 3. & 4 & 16. [...]. Imperf. Math. [...]. 49. Qui [...] quae sit vera Ecclesia, vnde cognoscat [...] per Scripturas. Iren. li. 3. c. 11. [...]. sum. li. 3. tr. 3. ca. 3. Si queritur quare credis hoc vel il­lud, non est [...] vnica responsio, scilicet, quia ita docet prima veritas. Fides enim soli primae veritati nititur, nec [...] medium ad probandum aliquem articulum. [...]. d. vnit. Eccles. c. 16. Remotis ergo omnibus talibus, Ecclesiam suam demonstrent si possunt, non in sermonibus & rumoribus Afrorum, non in Concilijs [...], non in literis [...] disputatorum, non in signis & prodigijs fallacibus, quia [...] contrà ista ver­bo [...] & [...] redditi [...], sed in praescripto legis, in Prophetarum praedictis, in Psalmorum can­tibus, E in ipsius pastoris vocibus, in [...] & [...], hoc est in omnibus Canonicis [...] librorum [...]. Ibid. [...] vtrum ipsi: Ecclesiam reneant, non [...], catio­nicis libris ostendant, quià nec nos proptereà dicimus nobis credere oportere quòd in Ecclesia Christi sumus, quià ipsam quam tenemus commendauit Mileuitanus Optatus, vel Mediolanensis [...] vel [...] nostrae communionis Episcopi, aut quià [...] Collegarum concilijs, ipsa praedicata est, aut quià per totum [...] in locis sanctis quae frequentat nostra communio tanta mirabilia vel exauditionum vel sanitatum fiunt., Luc. 8.11. Ia. 1.18. [Page 21] [...] A [...] [...] [...] [...] it selfe vpon the Apostles [...] word and Doctrine, which is principally contained in the Scripture.

[...].

Into this principle S t. Augustine resolued his faith a­gainst B the [...] (who pretended the Scriptures were cor­rupted) confuting them by Tradition of the Church, affirming that he would not beleeue the Gospell, did not the authority of the Catholike Church induce him, assigning this as the last stay of his resolution in this point: for though he beleeued the Go­spel to [...] souer aignely certaine and true, vpon the authority of God [...] it, and that it was reuealed of God, vpon the authority of the Apostles who as sacred preached it: yet C that this Gospel (as we haue it) came incorrupt from the A­postles, he could haue no stronger or more excellent [...], than the testimony of the present Church descended by conti­nued succession of Bishops from the Apostles, neither can we imagine any higher, except we flye to particular and to priuate reuelation, which is absurd.

ANSWER. D

S t. Augustines words, C. Epist. Manichei. c. 4. Si inuenires a­liquem qui Euan­gelio nondum cre­dit quid [...] di­centi tibi non cre­do: ego vero non crederem nisi me [...] commoueret [...]. doe not proue, that after he was fully conuerted, he resolued his faith finally and principally into the authority of the Church, succeeding the Apostles.

First, S t. Augustine resolued his faith finally and principally, into that which he knew to be infallible and totally diuine. But he was not so persuaded of the Church, succeeding the Apostles, because he thought it possible for the principall members of that Church to [...], and be deceiued [...]. c. Crescon. l. 2. c. 21. Ecclesia­stici Iudices sicut homines [...], [...]., and he prefers the authority of the Scriptures, before the iudgement of Councels and Fa­thers E [...] [...] [...] &c. Et per concilia licere [...] emendari, &c., (in which some of our aduersaries place the [...] [Page 22] of Ecclesiasticall infallibility.) Moreouer it appeareth by Saint A Augustine in the second chapter of this Booke, that he did not make the authority of the Church, the highest ground of resolu­tion of his faith: for he saith that manifest verity is to be preferred before all other tbings, whereby he was held in the Catholike Church Aug. c. Ep. Ma­nich. c. 4. Multa sunt alia, quae in eius graemio me justissime teneant. Tenet consensio populorum, at (que) gentium [...] authoritas, miraculis inchoata, charitate aucta vetustate firmata, &c. apud vos vero nihil est horum, &c. sola personat veritatis pollicitatio. Quae quidem si tàm manifesta monstra­tur vt in dubium venire non possit preponenda est [...] illis rebus quibus in Catholica teneor.: but that whose authority must be preferred before all other things, is the highest ground of faiths resolution.

Secondly, because S t. Augustines meaning in this place is ob­scure B and dubious, our aduersaries cannot conclude certainely from hence. 1. Some Schoolemen hold that he speaketh of ac­quisite or Historicall Faith, which is an introductiō to Scot. 3. d. 23. q. 1. Certum est quod in nobis est fides [...] cre­debilium acquifita: quod patet per Aug. c. fundament. Manich, qui dicit, quod non crederet Euang. nisi crede­ret Ecclesiae Ca­tholicae approban­ti & authorizanti libros illos, &c. Gabr. 3. d. 23. q. 2. ar. 2. c. 1. infused faith, and then it is inconsequent to argue, that because Saint Augustine at his first conuersion, and being a Nouice in Faith, did ground his Historicall faith vpon the authority of the Church, therefore the authority of the Church is vniuersally, and after men are conuerted, the highest ground of resolution. Most men are at first induced by externall motiues, to giue credit to the Scriptures, as C the people of Samaria Canus loc. l. 2. c. 8. Negotium Au­gustino erat cum Manichaeis, qui abs (que) controuersia, suo [...] Euan­gelio credi vole­bant & Manich. fi­dem adstruere. Ro­gat [...] August. ecquid [...] sint si in hominem incidant qui non Euangelio quidem credat, quoue genere persuasionis sint eum in [...] sententiam adducturi, certe se affirmat non aliter potuisse adduci vt [...], quam Ecclesiae authoritate victum. Non itaque docet fundatam efse Euangelij fidem in Ecclesiae authoritate, verum simpliciter [...] efse certam viam qua Infideles siue Nouitij, in fide ad Sacros Libros [...], nisi Catholicae Ecclesiae vnum eundem (que) consensum. pa. 35. Al. Hal. 3. q. 78. memb. 2. Ratio & fides quae est ex ratione, se [...] ad fidem gratuitam, ficut preambula dispositio ad formam. Disponit enim animam ad receptionem luminis, quo assentit primae veritati propter se, sed per modum naturae non gratiae, & dicitur ipsum in [...] seta [...] & tunc ratio [...] humana, quando ei non innititur fides introducta. were by the testimony of the woman, to beleeue that Christ was a Prophet, Ioh. 4.42. Altisiodor. summa in prolog. & li. 3. tr. 3.9.4. But as these people afterwards beleeued, because of Christs owne words, so they which by the Churches authority are first persuaded to heare and reade the doctrine of the Scriptures, afterwards by the light of grace doe perceiue the diuine Maiestie, wisedome, efficacie, and verity of the said do­ctrine, and resolue their faith into the diuine authority of the ho­ly Ghost, manifesting himselfe in the Scripture, or doctrine of the Scripture. D

Secondly, other learned Papists hold that S t. Augustine, in the place obiected, by the authority of the Church, vnderstood the Church wherein the Apostles themselues gouerned, and of E which they were parts; [...]. dial. p. 1. l. 1. c. 4. Intelligi­tur solum. d. Eccle­sia quae [...] tem­pore [...]. Gabr. lect. [...]. can. missae D. [...]. in sent. l. 1. q. 1. ar. 3. fol. 50. & quest. vesper vtrum Petri Ecclesia fol. 278. & 294. Can. [...]. Colon. p. 69. Dried. d. [...]. Eccl. l. 4. c. 4. fol. 239. Th. Wald. to 1. l. 2. c. 21. Durand. 3. d. 24.4.1. [...]. d. [...]. vit. lect. 2. Coral. 7. Et hic ap­peritur [...] intelligendi [...] Aug. Euangelio non [...] nisi me authoritas Ecclesiae compulisset. [...] enim [...] pro congregatione fidelium, [...] qui Christum audierunt, [...] & ejus testes fuerunt. and then no meruaile if he resolued his [Page 23] faith into the authority of the Church, because in this notion the A Church comprehends the Colledge of the Apostles, whose te­stimony concerning the Scripture was altogether Diuine. And although S t. Augustine conioyneth the authority of the latter Church with the former, wherein were the Apostles, yet he did not equally, and with the same manner of beleeuing ground his faith vpon both: for when a Preacher deliuereth Apostolicall doctrine, we beleeue both the Preacher and the Doctrine, and we could not haue knowne the doctrine, but by the Preacher; yet we resolue not our faith, finally and principally into the authority of the Preacher, Turrian. 22. disp. 2. dub. 4. Non solū inter Gentiles, sed etiam inter Christianos, ante­quā quis adhibeat fidem humanā, te­stimonio Ecclesiae, fidem adhibit Con­cionatori, vel pa­rocho, &c. but into the diuine verity it selfe preached by him. B Euery thing by which we are mooued to beleeue, and without whose authority we should not haue beleeued, is not the princi­pall obiect whereunto diuine faith is finally resolued, as appea­reth by miracles, preaching, instruction of Parents, &c.

IESVIT.

Vpon the former place of Saint Augustine, the Ie­suit inferreth: That because we haue no stronger or more excellent proofe than the testimonie of the present Churcb C descended by continuall succession of Bishops from the Apo­stles, to confirme that the Gospell, as wee haue it, came in­corrupt from the Apostles, therefore Saint Augustine re­solued his faith, that it was Apostolicall, finally and princi­pally into the authority of the present Church.

ANSWER.

Saint Augustine deliuers not the former, and therfore the Iesuit cannot inferre the latter: we haue indeed no stronger or more ex­cellent D morall proofe Occbam. dial. part. 3. tr. 1. l. 3. c. 23. [...] possibi­lis & sufficiens, quamuis non sit in­fallibilis., than the perpetual testimony of the Church succeeding the Apostles: but we haue a stronger and more excel­lent diuine proofe, to wit, the Prophesie of Christ and his Apostles, concerning the perpetuall preseruation of the Gospell vnto the end of the world: also that the Aposcolical Scriptures were once incorrupt, is manifest August. d. vtilit. cred. c. 3. Voluit nescio quos cor­ruptores [...] librorum &c. Aug. d. [...]. cred. c. 3. [...] cóuinci po­test [...] Scrip­turas esse falsatas, &c., because they were giuen by diuine inspira­tion. And it is apparant that they were not afterwards corrupted, because no authority or sufficient Argument can be produced to procue them in whole, or in part, to haue been corrupted Aug. Epist. 48. Noque [...] integritas atque notitia literarum vnius quamlibet illustris Episcopi custodiri quema [...] Scriptura Canonica [...] linguarum [...] & ordine & successione cele­branonis Ecclesiastica custoditur, &c. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. 3.10. [...]..

Now that which being once knowne by diuine testimony to E haue beene incorrupt, cannot be prooued afterwards to haue been [Page 24] corrupted, doth by diuine testimony appeare to be incorrupt, be­cause A the first diuine testimony standeth still in force.

The Text of the Gospell was once knowne by diuine testi­monie to haue beene incorrupt, and it cannot be prooued to haue beene afterwards corrupted, Ergo,

It doth still appeare by diuine testimonie that the Text of the Gospell is incorrupt, and the resolution of Faith finally and prin­cipally resteth vpon that diuine testimonie, and not vpon the [...] of the present Church.

Lastly, the harmony & coherence of the Gospel, both with the Scriptures of the old Testament, Lu. 24.27. Act. 28.23. and of the B seuerall parts of the Gospel among themselues Scot. prol. 1. Sent. artic. 4. & ib. Damian Giner. pa. 9. Secunda via &c. Ioh. ab Incarna­tione 1. Sen. pro. q. 2. Lect. 3. pag. 20. de secundo &c. Bellar. d. ver. Dei li. 1. ca. 2. Read his words be­fore pag. 27. do manifest that the text of the new Testament is incorrupt. For if the same were corrupted in any part, corruption of words would produce alte­ration and difference of matter: but we find at this day a perfect harmonie of all the parts of the Gospell among themselues, and a perfect agreement of the same with the Scriptures of the old Te­stament: And from the same being an inward Argument, we may collect, that the text of the Gospell is at this day incorrupt.

Now hauing so many Arguments, besides the authoritie of the present Church, to prooue the integritie of the text of the C Gospell, we do not flie, neither is it necessarie to flie to priuat Spirit, or particular Reuelation for assurance: and that which our Aduersaries obiect against vs, saying, that we resolue our Faith and Religion into the priuat Spirit, is a foolish calumniation, for we resolue our Faith into the authoritie of Gods outward word (expoun­ded vnto vs by such helpes and meanes, as both the Scripture it selfe, and the antient Church require) as into the diuine motiue, and obiect of beleefe: and we affirme that his grace and holy Spirit, working by the outward meanes, inableth, draweth, and persuadeth the conscience to assent, Iohn 6.45. & 12.37, 38.1. Cor. D 2.12. &c. 12.3. & 2. Cor. 3.5. Act. 16.14. 1. Iohn 2.20.27. Esay 50.5. And herein we flie to no priuat Spirit or Reuelation, but maintaine the ordinarie assistance of diuine grace, according to the doctrine of the holy Scripture, and of S. Augustine Aug. Ep. [...]. tr. 2. Quicquid illarum Scripturarum est sonat Christū, sed si aures inueniat. Et apperuit eis sen­sum vt intellige­rint Scripturas, &c. Ibid. tr. 3. Interior Magister est qui docet, &c. pa. 741. &c. ep. Manich. c. 14. & ep. 107. & sup. Psal. 126. & d. prae­dest. Sanct. c. 8. & epist. 121. in fine., and the common Tenet of the Scholemen themselues Canus loc. li. 2. ca. 8. [...] 22. q. 1. art. 1. concl. 4. pa. 12. Quantum ad formalem rationem credendi pendet no­stra fides immediate a spirito Sancto illuminante mentes nostras. [...]. Tena. Com. Heb. 11. diff. 1. sect. 5. n. 26. In genere causae efficientis reducitur assensus nostrae fidei in nostrum intellectum, vt instrumentum vitale: In [...] verò internum, & habituale fidei vt in causam propriam & proximam, eleuantem intellectum nostrum ad [...] assensum. [...] d. ver. relig. li. 1. ca. 14. pag. 55. Gillius d. sacra Doctr. & essent. Dei & li. [...]. tract. 2. ca. 2. n. 4. [...]. Tripl. ca. 16. Ipsa diuini Spiritus in corde persuasio principalis causa & [...] resolutio fidei [...] est. [...]. E sup. 1. Corinth. ho. 7. Fideles per Spiritum experientiam affecuti, in absconditis virturem [...]. Aquin. 22. q. 6. at. 1. Capreol. 3. d. 24. q. vnic. pa. 177. Arragon. 22. q. 1. ar. 1. conclus. 6. (dicit) fideles credere res seu misteria fidei, quià Deus illa reuelauit. Quod autém Deus illa [...], immediatè credere, quià interins [...] per specialem [...], iuxtà illud: Qui credit in filium Dei habet restimonium Dei in se. Rich. [...]. 2. dict. 23. q. 2. [...]. 1. Fides non est ex auditu solo, sed principalitèr per [...] interiorem..

IESVITS 2. Argument. A

Secondly, J [...] that common vnlearned people (the greatest part of Christianitie) are persuaded about all sub­stantiall points of Faith, by Tradition, not by Scripture Com­mon vnlearned people haue true Christian Faith in all points necessarie and snfficient vnto Saluation, but they haue not Faith of all these maine and substantiall points grounded on Scripture, for they can neither vnderstand nor read any B Scripture, but translated into vulgar languages; and so if they beleeue vpon Scripture, they beleeue vpon Scripture translated into their mother tongue: but before that they can know that the Scriptures are truely translated euen in all substantiall points, that so they may build of it, they must first know what are the maine and substantiall points, and firmely beleeue them, so that they would not beleeue the Scrip­ture translated against them; for if they knew them not be­fore, C how can they know that Scriptures, in places that con­cerne them, are truely translated: if they do not before hand firmely beleeue them, why should they bee readie to allow tran­slations that agree with them, and to reiect the translations which differ from them? Ergo,

Originally, and before they know any Scripture, they haue Faith grounded on the Tradition of their ancestors, by the light whereof they are able to judge of the truth of Transla­tions D about such substantiall points as they firmely beleeue by Tradition.

ANSVVER.

The question which the Iesuit vndertaketh to prooue in his foure Arguments, is, that our resolution of Faith stayeth finally vpon the perpetuall Tradition of the Church, and not vpon the Scripture. E

His second argument to prooue this, is taken from the man­ner of vulgar and illiterate people in resoluing their Faith: For if these, being the greater part of Christianitie, do ground their Creed (touching all points of doctrine necessarie to Saluation) vpon Tradition of their ancestors, andif they haue true Faith before they know and vn­derstand [Page 26] the Scripture, then Christian Faith (at least-wise among the A greater part of Christians) is resolued finally into the Tradition of an­cestors, and not of the Scriptures.

And he prooueth that these vulgar people haue Faith touch­ing all points necessarie to Saluation, before they know the Scriptures, because it is impossible for them to read or vnderstand Scripture vntill it be translated into their mother tongue: and they are not able to iudge of translations, or know them to be true, vnlesse they first beleeue the principall points of Christian Faith, and by comparing translations of Scripture with the said doctrines of Faith formerly by them beleeued, be inabled to B iudge of the Truth of Translations.

This Paralogisme hath certaine ambiguous or equiuocall termes which must be distinguished, and then I will applie my answer.

First, the terme of Scripture may be taken for the letter and text of the Scripture, together with the names of the seueral Bookes, Authors, and Sections: and secondly it may signifie the doctrine of the Scripture, without mention of the particular Bookes, Iohn 7.38. Rom. 1, 2, 3, 4.

Secondly, Resolution of Faith, is either distinct and explicite Aquinas 3. d. 25. q. 2. [...]. 3. d. 25. q. 3. Gabr. 3. d. 25. q. vnit. No­tab. 2. Occham Dial. part. 2. tract. 1. c. 10. Bannes, Lorca, Tur­rian Malder. 22. q. 2. art. 5. Mych. Me­dina d. recta in Deum fid. li. 4. c. 4. & ca. 10., C wherein beleeuers are able to declare the seueral reasons of their Faith, and to proceed from one reason of beleeuing to another, vntill they ascend by degrees to the principall ground: or else Implicit and Vertuall Ioh. d. Colon. Ex Scoto. Cognos­cere confuse, est cognoscere secun­dum quod expri­mitur per nomen, vel in suo vniuer­sali tantùm. Cog­noscere distinctè, est cognoscete se­cundum quod ex­primitur per defi­nitionem, vel per propria sua princi­pia., wherein beleeuers cannot proceed distinct ly, and with explication of the seuerall reasons and grounds of Faith, but resting themselues vpon one prime and radicall ground, are readie, for the authoritie of the same, to beleeue all other particular reasons and verities of Faith, when they are de­clared vnto them.

Thirdly, Tradition may signifie either doctrine of Faith, and D good manners, not contained or written in holy Scripture, ex­pressely or inuoluedly; or else the same doctrine which is found in holy Scripture, deliuered by Ancestors or Teachers by word of mouth.

These distinctions premised, I answer the obiection, 1. Gran­ting that some vulgar people, and nouices in Faith Ruffin. Eccles. Hist. 1. li. c. 9. &c. 10. Christum esse De­um Dej summi fili­um qui salutem hanc contulerit, docet, eumquè quem authorem suae sciret esse incollumitatis & vitae inuocan­dum docet &c. Adest captiua edocet Deum Christum supplicandi ritum venerandiquè modum &c. [...]. li. 3. c. 4., may at­taine beleefe concerning such verities of Christian Doctrine as are absolutely necessarie to Saluation, by the Tradition of their Ancestors and Teachers, without distinct and explicit resoluing their Faith into the Text of holy Scripture, or the particular E Bookes or Sections thereof. But withall I deny, that they can [Page 27] haue sauing Faith, without resoluing the same into the doctrine A of the Scriptures Card. Camerac. Vesper. recōmend. s. Script. Audite quaeso qualitèr su­per sacrae Scriptu­rae fundamentum [...] domus ad­dificatur & insh ui­tur omnis Ecclesiae caetus, omnis sta­tus, omnis gradus, omnis sexus.. For example, It is an Article of Faith ne­cessarie to be beleeued by all Christians of riper yeres, that Iesus Christ is the [...] of the World, and the same Article is re­uealed and taught in many Texts of holy Scripture. If a simple rurall person beleeue this Article taught him by his parents and other teachers, he beleeueth the Doctrine of the Scripture, and vertually grounds his Faith vpon the Scripture, although hee know not the Bookes of the Scripture, or the particular senten­ces contained in the same. A man which drinketh water flow­ing B from a fountaine, or seeth day light, although he haue no di­stinct knowledge of the fountaine, or sight of the Sunne, which is the cause of light, yet hee receiueth water mediatly from the fountaine it selfe, and his light principally from the Sunne; so likewise rude and illiterate Christians, reape the benefit and fruit of the Scriptures, and vertually ground their Faith vpon them, although they be not able distinctly to looke into them, or to resolue their Faith into the seuerall parts and testimonies con­tained in them Gregor. [...]. li. 30. ca. 12. Iu­menta escam accipiunt dum sacrae Scripturae pabulo, mentes dudum brutae satiuntur. August. sup. Psal. 8. Ex C ore infantium & lactantium perfecisti laudem, vt a fide Scripturarum inciperent, qui cupiunt ad tuae Magnificen­tiae notitiam peruenire..

OBIECTION.

Vulgar andilliterate persons do not know or vnderstand the Scriptures, neither can they be certaine by their owne knowledge, that the same are truely translated in such points as the yare bound to beleeue, therefore they cannot ground their Faith finally and lastly vpon the Scriptures. D

ANSVVER.

1. If this Obiection were good, vulgar people could not ground their diuine Faith vpon Tradition, because they haue not distinct knowledge of Tradition, or of the qualitie or deriuati­on thereof.

Therefore I distinguish of Knowledge out of Bonauenture, [...]. 3. d. 25. q. 3. Cogni­tio potest scire ali­quid in vniuersa­li, & ita [...] quòd non sciat in particulari & ità scire vno modo, & ignorare alio mo­do. [...] potest esse aliquid duplicitur [...] se, vel in alio. Alexander Hall 3. q. 82. m. 4. ar. [...] & 2. that the same is two fold, to wit, either confused and generall, or distinct and speciall, and a thing may be knowne two waies, either in it selfe, or in another. If vulgar and illiterate people could know E and vnderstand the Scriptures, neither confusedly, nor distinctly, neither in themselues, nor in any other thing, then it were im­possible [Page 28] that they should resolue their Faith into them: but if A they may know them by teaching of others, and vnderstand the Doctrine of the Scriptures to be diuine by the light of heauenly veritie resplendent in the same [...]. [...]. tom. 3. sup. Thom. dip. 1. punct. 7. pag. 320. [...] cogni­tio illa sacris ex­pressa literis quam Deus [...] Scriptoribus indi­dit, quamque per illos voluit caeteris scripto patefieri, velut sonorú quod­dam verbum Dei est, quo is, videli­cet, conceptum ae­ternae mentis suae, notitiamque veris­simam, hominibus eloquitur at (que) ma­nifestat., and by the inward testimonie of the holy Spirit co-working with that Doctrine Chrys. sup. 1. Cor. hom. 7. Fideles per [...] assecuti, in absconditis vit­tutem intuentur. Arrag. 2. 2. q. 1. at. 1. c. 6. Fideles cre­dunt res seu miste­ria fidei, quià De­us illa reuelauit. Quod autèm Deus illa reuelauerit, im­mediate credunt, quià interius mo­uentur per specia­lem instinctú, iux­ta illud: Qui D cre­dit in filium Dei habet testimonium Dei in se, 2. Ioh. 5.10., then it is possible for them to resolue their Faith into the Scripture, be­cause they which actually resolue their Faith into the Doctrine of the Scripture, doe virtually and mediatly resolue the same into the verie Scripture, euen as he that actually beleeueth the kings proclamation, doth virtually beleeue the kings authoritie, although he know the king or his authoritie confusedly, and in B generall only.

The Text of holy Scripture, and the distinct sayings and sen­tences thereof, are the principall and finall externall ground, whereupon the whole bodie of the Church must ground their Faith Maclin. in 1. part. Tho. q. 1. ar. 9. Sacra Scriptu­ra omnibus hominibus communitèr proponitur. Aquin. 1. q. 1. artic. 9. Salmeron. tom. 1. prolog. 1. pag. 3. Merito igitur vnica nobis Scriptura commendata est, ad quam ab Ecclesia Catholica atquè Orthodoxa intellecta tanquam ad lapidem Lydium probandi sunt Spiritus doctrinaequè vniuersae, non secus atquè conclusiones per sua principia & actiones per proprium finem dignoscuntur.. But as there is a diuersitie of the members of the Church, 1. Cor. 12.20. so likewise there is a difference betweene them in the manner of resoluing Faith: for the stronger and firmer mem­bers are able to resolue their Faith distinctly into Scripture, but the weaker members whose Faith (as Bonauenture speaketh) is dimi­nuta Li. 3. d. 23. Alex. Hall 3. q. 82. m. 4. art. 1. Ad id de mensura &c., seeble and imperfect in respect of the distinct apprehen­sion C of the obiect of Faith Greg. Nyssen vita Mosis. Mons arduus & assensu difficilis, Theologia est, cujus vix multitudo ad radices ascen­dere potest. Aug. d. Trin. li. 14. ca. 1., are guided by the stronger, as chil­dren by a nurse. And these little ones are taught the truth of hea­uenly Doctrine, 1. By their parents Euseb. Hist. li. 6. c. 2. A patre attenta cura & cogitatione laboratum erat vt sacras literas vna combiberet. Fransc. Picus Theorem 23., or ecclesiasticall teachers, and they know the Scriptures to be truely translated, not by their owne skill, but by crediting others which are able to iudge. But being thus farre directed and persuaded by humane meanes Bannes 22. q. 1. ar. 1. dub. 4. Quemad assentimur primis principijs naturalibus ante notitiam explicitam terminorum, assensu quodam confuso, posteà verò habita [...] assentimur [...]: Ita antequàm infundatur nobis fides assentimur confusè articulis fidei per sidem [...] cis qui res sidei nobis proponunt credendas, posteà verò infundente Deo [...] jam [...] articulis distinctè & immediatè per ipsam sidem quae illos nobis ostendir., then the light of Gods word it selfe, by the power of Grace, persuadeth them as a diuine cause, to yeeld full assent to all such verities as are necessarie to be beleeued by them to saluation.

IESVIT. E

And this is that which Protestants must meane (if they haue any true meaning) when they say that the common [Page 29] people knew Scriptures to be truely translated by the light of A the Doctrine shining in true Translations, to wit, by the light of Doctrine receiued by Tradition of Ancestors, and thereup­on so firmely beleeue, as they will acknowledge Scriptures to be truely translated so farre, and no farther than they per­ceiue them consonant with the Faith deliuered vnto them, so that their last and finall resolution, for substantiall points, is not into Scripture truly translated into their vulgar tongue, but into Tradition, by the light whereof they discerne that B their Translations are true, more or lesse, according to the measure of knowledge they haue by Tradition.

ANSVVER.

The summe of the former obiection is, Vnlearned people are not able without the helpe and instruction of others to resolue their Faith into the Scriptures.

Therefore the Scripture is not the finall and greatest stay and ground of Faith. C

The Argument is denied: for as in Arts and Sciences, an vn­skilfull person cannot resolue his knowledge into the first prin­ciples, vntill he be taught the meaning of words and the sence of rules and precepts; but when he is taught, and vnderstandeth these, then he maketh resolution into the very first principles themselues: So likewise in beleeuing, the Obiect of Faith must be taught, the sence of the words, and matter declared, the grounds and reasons of credibilitie deliuered, and then the be­leeuer principally and immediately, settles the resolution of his Faith not vpon these helps and instruments which are only dis­pofitiue D and adiuuant causes Gillius, d. sa­cra Doctr. & d. Deo li. 1. Tract. 2. c. 2. In­strumentum quod­dam applicans ve­rum motiuum au­thoritatis Diuinae., but vpon the first principles them­selues expressely or deriuatiuely contained in holy Scripture.

And whereas D r. Ioh. Wh. is produced, affirming in the behalfe of all Protestants, that common people know Scriptures to be truely translated by the light of the Doctrine shining in true Translations.

First D r. Wh. in the place assigned, speaketh not in particular of common people, but of the true Church Way to the Church, pa. 24., in which are found many persons skilfull and learned.

h Lactantius d. vero cultu li. 6. cap. 21. Num igitur Deus & mentis & vocis & mentis [...] disertè lo­qui E non potest &c. Orig. Hom. 2. in Ierem. Cedren. in Ptolomeo Philadelpho. Rex pulchritudinem sacrae Scripturae videns &c. Secondly, he deliuereth other meanes (besides the light of E Doctrine) whereby the Church may know that Translations are true Ib. pag. 25., to wit, knowledge of Tongues, rules of Art, ministerie of the Word, to which I adde analogie of Faith, the testimonie of the [...] Church, and best learned in all ages. All these are helpes and [Page 30] instruments of right Translations, and when the Scriptures are A translated, they manifest their Author and sacred authoritie to such as in a right manner are conuersant in hearing or reading them. And this is not only the Tenet of Protestants, but, besides the antient Fathers, of moderate Papists themselues Serran. Apar. fid. pag. 55. Lux sua se vi ipsam prodit, & in oculis perspi­cacibus est efficax, lucernam qui prae­fert lucem quidem profert, at ipse non lucet, Lucis propri­um est lucere, ho­munis lucem pro­ferre, Ita Scripture lux per se lucet, ho­minum ministerio hominibus efficax &c. Et pa. 51. Ea certè vis est Scripturae à Deo inspiratae vt Dei Maiestas in ea eluceat.. There is (saieth one of them) such power in Scripture inspired of God, that the maiestie of God shineth in it. And this speech is the same in ef­fect with that of Constantine the great, reported by Theoderet, Grecè cap. 25. [...]. Hist. li. 1. ca. 24. Obseruans fidem diuinam, adipiscor lumen veritatis, sequens lumen veritatis, agnosco diuinam fidem, Marking the diuine Faith, I obtaine the light of Truth, and following the light of B Truth, I acknowledge diuine Faith, Quod est manifestatiuum alte­rius, simul potest manifestare seipsum, sicut lux quo actu prodit colores prodit seipsam, & cum ego quicquam loquor, eadem locutione, manifesto rem & loguelam (sayth Petrus de Lorca, 22. q. 1. ar. 1. disp. 4. n. 8.) That which is a manifestator of another thing, may together manifest it selfe, as appeareth inlight which doth manifest it selfe by the same act, whereby it sheweth colours: and by speech, for when I speake, by one and the same speech, I manifest the thing spoken, and mine owne speaking. The same is affirmed by Peresius Peres. Ajala d. Trad. part. 2. pag. 11., Canus Canus loc. li. 2. ca. 8., Fra. Petigianus Fra. Petig. 3. d. 23. pag. 17. Fides praestat assensum reuelationi, vt [...], non per a­liam reuelationem sed per seipsam., and C it is so farre from being vnlikely that the holy Scripture, when it is receiued, doth manifest it selfe, and his author, that it is most absurd to imagine the contrarie: for the Scripture is a diuine light, Psal. 119.105.2. Pet. 1.19.2. Cor. 4. 6. And it is the voice and speech of God Greg. li. 4. E­pist. 40. Scripturam sacram Epistolam quandam esse dici­mus omnipotentis Dei ad creaturam suam. [...]. 2. Thes. hom. 3. Aug. in Psal. 90. De illa ciuitate vnde peregrinamur literae nobis venerunt, ipsae sunt Scripturae., Luc. 1. 71. And the Iesuit cannot persuade any reasonable man to thinke that God almightie who bestowed tongues and voices vpon men, with abilitie so to expresse them­selues, that others might vnderstand their voice and know them by it, should speake himselfe in the Scripture so darkely and se­cretly, that people, when they are eleuated by grace, cannot dis­cerne D the same to be his word or voice. We know other crea­tures to be Gods worke by footsteps Aug. d. Trin. li. 6. c. 10. Alex. Hall. 3. q. 30. m. 2. ar. 3. § 2. Aquinas 1. q. 45. ar. 7. of his power, wisdome, and goodnesse appearing in them. The holy Scripture excelleth all created things in wisdome and perfection, it cannot therefore be destitute of signes and impressions to manifest vnto them which are inspired with grace vnto beleeuing, that God himselfe is the author.

IESVITS 3. Argument. A

If the mayne and substantiall points of Christian faith must be firmely knowne and beleeued, before we can securely reade and truely vnderstand the holy Scriptures: then the mayne and substantiall points of faith are beleeued, not vpon Scripture, but vpon Tradition precedently vnto Scripture.

This is cleare, because true faith is not built, but vpon Scripture truely vnderstood of man: neither can Scripture B vntill it be truely vnderstood of a man, bee to him a ground of assured persuasion: But we cannot vnderstand the Scrip­ture securely, and aright, before wee know the substantiall Articles of faith, which all are bound expresly to beleeue: the summarie comprehension of which point, is tearmed, The rule of faith, Tertul. de prescrip. c. 13.

ANSVVER. C

The sequel of the Maior is denied. It followeth not, that al­though the mayne and substantiall points of faith must be firme­ly knowne and beleeued, before we can securely reade and truely vnderstand the holy Scriptures, in the particular texts and secti­ons thereof: therefore the said substantiall points are not belee­ued vpon Scripture, but vpon Tradition vnwritten. [...] d. Ecclesia pa. 220. Fides in suo exordio adhuc lan­guida, multis eget adminiculis donec astipuletur & sub­mittat se Scriptu­ris. At vbi ad matu­ritaté suam fuerit progressa, amplius haud perindè opus habet illis externis presidijs sed tum veritaté ex ipsamet Scriptura liquidius aspicit, internis quae in ea latent argu­mentis, omni hu­mano modo subli­miorib' ducta at (que) permota, atq, sic fi­des illa [...] confir­mata suo proprio nititur sundaméto nec fulcitur ampli' solis externis ad­miniculis.

The reason of the inconsequence is, for that the mayne and substantiall points of faith, may be knowne and beleeued by the doctrine of the Scripture, touching the said points deliuered to D people, by those which haue faithfully collected the same into a Summarie, out of the particular and distinct sentences of the ho­ly Scriptures. And they that beleeue this doctrine of the Scrip­tures, may attaine the knowledge and faith of substantiall points of Christianity, before themselues can reade and vnderstand the said Bookes: yet they resolue not their faith into vnwritten Tra­dition (according to the Popish meaning, where by vnwritten Tra­dition is vnderstood doctrine of faith, neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture) but into the doctrine of the Scripture, collected and deliuered vnto them by others, and vertually and E immediately into the holy Scripture it selfe (as I haue formerly shewed, in answer to the second Argument.)

That which followeth in the obiection touching the rule of faith, prooueth not that Christian beliefe is resolued lastly and [Page 32] finally into vnwritten Tradition: because the rule of faith, is not A such vnwritten Tradition, as is neither exprefly, nor by conse­quent contained in Scripture: but a Summarie of the principall Articles of Christian [...] contained in the Apostles Creed; and which may be gathered out of the plaine texts and sentences of holy Scripture Chrys. in symb. Hom. 1. [...]. d. Trinit. c. 1. ca. 9. ar. 9. Aug. d. Temp. Ser. 119. Chrysolog. Serm. 61. In symb. Leo. Serm. 11. d. pas­sione Dom. Alex. Hal. 3. q. 82. m. 5. ar. 2. Creatorem caeli & terrae: à capite Scripturae accipit illud, &c. Qui con­ceptus est de spiri­tu sancto: sumitur iste articulus de Math. 1. Inuenta est habens in vte­ro, &c. Cassian. d. Incarnat. li. 6. c. 3. Quicquid per di­uersum diuinorum voluminū corpus, immensa [...] copia, totum in symboli colligitur breuitate perfecta. Paschas. d. spirit sancto prefat., and therefore all they which resolue their faith into the said rule, refolue the same also into the plaine do­ctrine of the Scripture. And that the rule of faith is such, it ap­peareth.

First, by the branches and Articles of that rule, which are; B I beleeue in God, the Father Almighty, &c. And in Iesus Christ, his onely Sonne our Lord, &c. With the rest of the Articles of the Apostles Creed, reade 1. Cor. 15.1, 2, 3.1. Tim. 3.16. And Tertull. in the place alleaged by the Iesuite Tertul. prae­script. c. 13. Regula est autem fidei, vt iam quid credamus profiteamur. Illa D scilicet, qua credi­tur, vnum omninò deum effe, nec alium preter mundi crearorem, qui vniuersa de nihilo produxerit per verbum suum, primò omnium emissum. Id verbum filium eius appellatum, in nomine Dei varie visum Patriarchis, in Pro­phetis semper auditum, postremò delatum ex spiritu Dei Patris, & virtute in Virginem Mariam, carnem factum in vtero eius, & ex ea natum hominem, & esse Iesum Christum, exindè predicasse nouam legem, & nouam promis­sionem regni caelorum, virtutes fecisse, fixum cruci, tertia die refurexisse: in caelos ereptum sedere, ad dexteram Pa­tris, misisse vicariam vim spiritus Sancti, qui credentes agat, venturum cum claritate, ad sumendos sanctos, in vitae aeternae & promissorum caelestium fructum, & ad prophanos iudicandos igni aeterno, facta vtriusque partis re­suscitatione, cum carnis resurrectione. [...] regula à Christo instituta, &c. Iren. lib. 1. c. 3. August. Enchyr. cap. 56., and in his Booke d. vel. virg. Tertul. d. vel. [...]. c. 1. Regula quidem fidei, vna omninò est, sola immobilis & irreformabilis, credendi seilicet in vnum Deum omnipotentem mundi creatorem, & filium eius Iesum Christum, natum ex Virgine Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, terto die resuscitatum, à mortuis receptum in caelis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram Patris, [...] iudicare viuos & mortuos, per carnis etiam Refurrectionem. rehearsing the ancient rule of faith, doth not mention any one Article, which is not expresly or by deriuation contained in holy Scripture.

Secondly, the rule of faith extendeth not it selfe beyond the bounds of the Gospel, Gallath. 1.8. Tertul. de prescript. c. 6. Ibid. cap. 6. Nobis curiositate opus non est post Iesum Christum: nec inquifitione post Euangelium, cum credimus nihil desideramus [...] cre­dere. E Hoc enim prius credimus, non esse quod vltra credere debeamus. but all the mayne and substantiall Articles of faith necessary to bee C beleeued generally to saluation, are contained in the plaine places of Euangelicall Scripture; as both [...]. Augustine August. d. doctrina Christ. lib. 2. cap. 9. In eis quae [...] in Scriptura posita sunt, Inueniuntur illa omnia, quae continent fidem moresque vi­uendi, spem scz. atque charitatem. and learned Pa­pists themselues affirme Bellarm. d. [...] Dei li. 4. c. 11. Scripta sunt ab Apostolis ea omnia quae absolute necessaria sunt ad salutem omnium [...]. [...]. d. Ecclesia dogm. lib. 2. cap. 3. pag. 60. Gerson. d. sensu sacr. Scrip. propos. 9.: wherefore if the rule of faith be only a summarie comprehension of the mayne and substantiall Arti­cles of Christianity, and all these Articles are contained in holy Scripture; then it followeth, that the rule of faith, is not vn­written Tradition alone (according to the Popish meaning) but a Summarie of beleese contained in the plainer sentences of ho­ly Scripture, either expresly, or by deduction.

[Page 33] [...], [...] [...], li. 3. d. doct. Christ. c. 2. saith, Consulat regu­lam fidei, quam de Scripturarum pla­nioribus locis, & Ecclèsiae authori­tate percepit. Let A a man seeke the rule of faith, which he hath learned of [...] places of Scripture, and of the authoritie of the Church: now the plainer places of Scripture, are a part of Scripture; and the authority of the Church exceedeth not the bounds of the Scrip­ture, according to S t. Hierom. Ecclesia Christi quae [...] bene & in [...] Ec­clesias possidens, spirit' veritate [...] est, & habet vibes legis [...], [...] & Apostolorū: Non est egessia de fini­bus suis, id est de Scripturis [...], &c. com. Mich. c. 1. And Durand the famous Schooleman, 2. dist. 44. q. 3. n. 9. Ecclesia licet habet dominatio­nem Dei in terris, illa tamen non ex­cedit limitationem Scripturae. Cusanus Concord. Cathol. li. 2. ca. 6. In loco congregatio­nis [...] in [...] ponebantur, Sacra Euan gelia &c. Secundum testimonium [...] decreuit C Synodus.

Out of the former definition of the rule of faith, it follow­eth, That because according to our Aduersaries doctrine, the be­leefe of Christians touching all maine and substantiall points of B faith, is resolued into the rule of faith: and the said rule, excee­deth not the limits of holy Scripture, being onely a summarie comprehension of the principall heads of Christian doctrine, collected from the plainer places of Scripture, and propounded by the authority of the Church confined to Scripture, that therefore the finall resolution of faith is not made into Tradition vnwritten, as the same signifies Doctrine, neither expresly nor in­uoluedly contained in holy Scripture, but into the Scripture, or doctrine of the Scripture it selfe.

IESVITS 4. Argument.

Those that vnderstand the Scriptures aright, must be such as they were to whom the Apostles writ and deliuered the Scriptures, and whose instruction they intended by their wri­ting: But the Apostles, as Dr. Field acknowledgeth, wrote to them they had formerly taught more at large, that were in­structed D and grounded in all substantiall and necessarie points of faith, that knew the common necessary obseruations of Christianitie: Ergo, they that reade, and presume to iuterpret the Scriptures, without first knowing, and firmely beleeuing by Tradition, at the least all necessary & substantiall points of faith, cannot with assurance vnderstand them, but may euen in manifest points mightily mistake: for the blessed Apostles writing to Christians, that were before hand fully taught E and setled in substantiall Christian doctrines and customes, doe ordinarily in their writings suppose such things as aboun­dantly knowne, without declaring them anew, onely tuching them cursorily by the way, and therefore [...], so that the [Page 34] already taught, might well vnderstand their sayings and no A other.

ANSWER.

The question is IESVIT, To which question I answere, That the last and finall reso­lution thoreof, is not [...] Scripture, but into the perpe­tuall Tradition of the Church [...] the Apostles., Whether the last and finall resolution of Faith is made into vnwritten Tradition, and not into Scripture.

The fourth Argument produced by the Aduersarie, to prooue this, is taken from the necessitie of vnwritten Traditian to ex­pound the Scripture. And the summe of the Argument is, With­out B a precedent instruction, or teaching by Tradition vnwritten, the ne­cessarie and substantiall points of Faith; wee cannot be firmely assured that we haue the right sence of the Scripture, as appeareth by the ex­ample of the Primitiue hearers of the Apostles, who were formerly instructed by them, and had the right Faith taught them more at large: and then being thus informed and prepared, they receiued the Scripture: and we haue no reason to promise vnto our selues more vnderstanding than the Apostles immediat hearers. And the Scriptures without Tra­dition are obscure, and do onely cursorily touch matters formerly taught more at large, Ergo,

The last and finall resolution of Faith is made into vnwritten Tradi­tion, C and not into Scripture.

In the Antecedent or leading part of this Argument, some things cannot be admitted without distinction, and some parts hereof are false, and the Argument it selfe is inconsequent.

First, they which in our daies vnderstand the Scripture aright, must be such as they were to whom the Apostles wrote, and deliuered the Scriptures &c. not simply, and in all things (for many things are requisit for the first plantation of Faith, which are not necessarie for the future continuance and propagation thereof,) but in such things onely as are common and ordinarie D for all ages.

Wherefore they which in our daies vnderstand the Scrip­tures aright, must ordinarily haue a preuious introduction by the teaching of others, and also there must be in them a mind de­sirous of Truth August. d. vti­tat. credendi c. 6. Planè ita modifica­ta, vt nemo inde haurire non possit, quod sibi satis est, si modo ad [...], deuotè ac [...], vt vera religio docet, accedat. [...]. in Psalm. 118. serm. 8. Docet Deus & mentes illuminat singulorum & claritatem cognitionis infundit, si tu aperias ostia cordis tui, & [...] gratiae recipias claritatem, & quando dubitas [...] as &c. [...]. Orth. [...]. li. 4. ca. 18. [...]., and a resolution and diligence to vse the meanes appointed by God, to learne the same: but that they must be instructed in the same manner as the Apostles hearers were, or learne all the necessarie points of Faith before they be­gin to read the Scriptures without any certaine vnderstanding, is affirmed by the Aduersarie, but not prooued. Also many of E the Apostles hearers read part of the Scriptures, to wit, the Scrip­tures [Page 35] of the Old Testament with profit, and some right vnder­standing A before they were generally taught all the grounds of the Gospell, for otherwise how could they haue examined the Doctrine of the Apostles by the Scriptures? Acts 17.11. And to what purpose did our Sauiour command the Iewes to search the Scriptures, Ioh. 5.39? August. Psal. 108. [...] jubet, non in superficie pertransire. Chrys. in Gen. hom. 37. August. Epist. 120. Ama Ecclesiasticas legere literas, & non multa inueni­es quae requiras ex me, sed legendo & ruminando, si eti­am purè dominum largitorem bono­rum omniū depre­ceris, omnia quae cognitione digna sunt, aut certè plu­rima, ipso magisin­spirante, quam ho­minum aliquo [...] perdisces. Chrysost. Gen. Hom. 35. Magna diligen­tia Scripturarum lectioni vacemus ita enim scientiam assequemur. Iustinian Com. 2. Tim. 3.15. Christus apud Iohannem ad Scripturarū lecti­onem prouocat Iu­deos, Ioh. 5.39. And why did the Apostles (preaching both to Iewes and Gentiles) confirme their Doctrine by the te­stimonie of the Scriptures, Ro. 9.9, 25, 29, 33. & ca. 10.11.13.16. 19. & ca. 11.2.8.9. & cap. 4.3.6.17. Iam. 2.23. 1. Pet. 2.6, if the people to whom they preached could at all haue no right vnder­standing of the Scriptures before they were fully and perfectly B grounded in the knowledge of all necessarie and substantiall points of Christian Faith?

Secondly, whereas the Iesuit addeth for confirmation of his Antecedent, That the Scriptures without Tradition are obscure, and that the Apostles did in them onely cursorily touch matters formerly taught: both those assertions, according to the Popish meaning, are false.

We acknowledge that many particular Texts and passages of holy Scripture are obscure and hard to be vnderstood Parcus, Com. Gen. 4. Non nega­mus Scripturā ni­hil habere obscu­ritatis &c. Whitak. d. Ecclesia pa. 220. Sunt quae­dam Scripturae, lo­ca de quibus nihil certò statui potest. Beza d. Not. Eccle­siae pa. 137. Philip Morn. d. Ecclesia c. 4. Zanch. d. Script. q. 11. Chemnic. Exam. pa. 57. Fulk. c. Rhem. Pref. fol. 2. Lubbert. d. Script. li. 4. ca. 2. Chimid. d. Script. li. 4. c. 4. D. Field of the Church, lib. 4. ca. 15., 2. Pet. 3. 16. But in such points as are necessarie for Christians to vnder­stand, because they are primarie or fundamentall, and in such C things as are necessary for the declaring and applying that which is fundamentall, the same is not so obscure, but it may by diligent reading, and vsing ordinarie meanes and helpes of knowledge, be rightly vnderstood by the learned, and also in a competent measure by the vnlearned, after the same is expounded and de­clared vnto them: For if the Scripture were generally and ab­solutely obscure to the vnlearned, then God would not haue commanded them to read the same, nor required them to heare the reading thereof, much lesse would he haue said, That by hea­ring the same, they and their children might learne to feare him, D and keepe his commandements, Deut. 31.11, 12, 13. And that the holy Scripture is in this manner perspicuous, the antient Fa­thers constantly affirme Orig. c. Celium. li. 7. [...] viri scrutan­do Scripturam, intellectum eius inuenire poterunt, licet reuera sit multis locis obscura. Ib. Ita diuina prouidentia &c. non solum eruditis Graecis, sed etiàm reliquis condescendit ad idioticum captum auditurae multitudinis, vt con­suetis E verbis apud eos vtendo, imperitos ad auscultandum alliceret, presertìm cum eis facile foret post primam il­lam introductionem, studiose scrutari sensus reconditiores in sacris [...], & peruestigare. Cuiuis enim est per­spicuum, qui modo has legat, quod qui eas diligentèr examinant, multo retrusiora inueniant, quam quae docentur prima specie.. S. Gregorie and S. Bernard Greg. ad Leandr. praefat. Iob c. 4. Quasi quidam est fluuius planus & altus, in quo agnus ambulet & Elephas [...]. Idem in ca. 4. Cant. Bernard. Serm. paru. 64. compare the holy Scriptures to a Riuer wherein the Elephant may swim, and the Lambe may wade: S. Ireneus Ireneus li. 2. ca. 46. Sunt autem haec quae ante [...] nostros occurrunt, & quae cunque apertè & sine ambiguo, ipsis dictionibus posita sunt in Scriptutis. Et ca. 47. saith, that some things in Scripture are apertly and cleerely without ambiguitie manifested to the eyes of our [Page 36] vnderstanding. Saint Augustine Aug. sup. Ioh. [...]. 50. Quaedam in Scripturis tam ma­nifesta sunt vt po­tius auditoré quam [...] desi­derent.: Some things are set downe so A plainely in the Scriptures, that they rather require a hearer than an ex­positar. And in another place, Et Id. sup. psal. 88. Et si quaedam sunt testa misterijs, quaedam tamen sic manifesta, vt ex ip­sis facilime aperi­antur [...]. Although some things are vailed with mysteries, yet againe some things are so manifest, that by the helpe of them, obscure things may bee opened. And againe, In eis quae a­pertè in Scriptura posita sunt, [...] illa omnia quae continent si­dem moresque vi­uendi: spem scilicet atque charitatem. Et d. vtilit. [...]. c. 6. [...] est mihi crede in Scripturis illis altum & diui­num est: [...] om­ninò veritas & re­ficiendis instaurā ­disque animis ac­comodatissima dis­ciplina: & planè [...] modificata, vt nemo inde haurire non possit quod si­bi satis est, [...] modo ad hauriendum de­uotè ac pie vt vera religio docet acce­dat. August. d. vnit. Ec­clesiae c. 4. Nec in aliqua Scripturarū obscuritate fallun­tur, sed notissimis & appertissimis ea­rū testimonijs con­tra dicunt. Et c. 5.6.27. Hoc etiam praedico at (que) propono vt quae (que) aperta & manifesta deligamus: quae si in sanctis Scripturis non inuenerentur, nullo modo esset vnde apperirentur clausa & illustrarentur obscura. All matters which containe faith, and good manners, are found in those things which are manifestly placed in the Scriptures. Saint Chrysostome: In diuine Scriptures all necessary things are plaine Chrys. Hom. 3. Thes. ep. 2. In diuinis Scripturis quaecun (que) necessaria sunt mani­festa sunt.. To the like purpose spea­keth S t. Hierom [...]. sup. Esay. c. 19. & in Psal. 86., Fulgentius Fulg. Serm. d. confess., Hugo Victor Hug. Vict. Miscel. 2. l. 1. Tit. 56., Theoderit Theod. in Gen. apud struch. p. 87., Lactantius Lact. l. 6. c. 21., Theophilus Antiochenus Theopb. Antioch. ad Autolich. l. 2. p. 918., Clem. Alexandrinus Clem. Alex. Orat. Adhort. ad Gentes. Cyril. [...]. Iul. l. 7. p. 160. Vt omnibus [...] nota paruis & magnis vtiliter familiari sermone E commendata sunt ita vt nullius captum transcendant., and the same is the common Tenet of the Primatiue Fathers. And Gregory Valence B confesseth that such places of Scriptures as containe Articles of faith absolutely necessary, are almost all of them plaine. The like is affirmed by Aquinas Th. Aq. part. 1. q. 1. ar. 9. c., Vasques Vasq. in Thom. part. 1. disp. 18. c. 4. n. 11., and Gonzales Gonzales in 1. p. Thom. at. 9. pag. 61..

The other clause of the Iesuits speech, to wit, That the Apo­stles in their Scripture did onely touch matters cursorily, for­merly taught, is false.

First, this Assertion is repugnant to Saint Augustine, who spea­king of the doctrine and deeds of our Sauiour, saith, d. cons. [...]. l. 1. c. 35. Quicquid ille de suis factis & dictis nos legere voluit, hoc scribendum illis tanquam manibus suis imperauit: Whatsoeuer Christ would haue vs reade C touching his owne sayings and workes, this hee commanded the Euangelists, as it were his owne hands, to write. And in another place, Aug. sup. [...] tr. 49. sanctus Euangelista testatur dominum Christum, & dixisse, & fecisse quae scripta non sunt: Electa sunt autem quae scribe­rentur, quae saluti [...] sufficere viderentur. Although Christ spake and wrought some things which are not written, yet those things which seemed vnto him sufficient to the salua­tion of beleeuers, were selected to be written. Saint Cyrill also affir­meth, Cyril. Alex. l. 12. Ioh. c. vltimo. Non omnia quae fecit Do­minus conscripta sunt, sed quae scribentes tam ad mores quam ad Dogmata [...] sufficere, vt recta fide, & operibus, & virtute [...], ad regnum [...]. that all things which Christ did are not written, but so much as holy writers iudged sufficient both for good manners and godly faith, to the end, that we shining in right faith, good workes, and vertue, may at­taine the heauenly Kingdome. By the iudgement of these Fathers, the holy Euangelists committed to writing so much of our Saui­ours D Doctrine and deeds as is sufficient for people to know, that they may bee illustrious in faith and vertue; and by the light whereof, they may come to saluation. In these things therefore the Euangelists did not cursorily touch matters, but largely and fully deliuer them.

[Page 37] Secondly, if the Scriptures containe all things sufficient to A saluation, yea, more than is sufficient, then the Apostles in their Scriptures did not cursorily, or by the way onely touch matters: But the first is affirmed, both by the Fathers Basil. praefat in Psa. vberimū quod­dam est & commu­ne promptuarium. Chrys. Gen. hom. 3. Non solum thesau­ro, &c. sed fonti quo (que) largis [...]. Greg. in Cant. c. 5. [...] plenissima, &c. si­ne minoratione ad plenum de [...] imuenitur., and confessed by some learned Papists. Vincent. [...], The Canon of the Scripture is perfit, and in it selfe sufficient for all mat­ters, yea more than sufficient. Antonius Perez, Pentateuch. fidei. vol. 4. c. 21. Vincent. Lir. [...] Haeres. c. 2. Cum [...] perfectus Scriptu­rarū Canon, [...] ad omnia satis su­per (que) sufficiat, &c. b Perez. p. 24. [...] autem comparetur vel [...] Scriptura [...] quae fides docet, tanquam necessaria [...] ad [...] plane redūdans est atque [...] in genere regule, quo­niā multa imo ple­ra (que) sunt in [...], quorū cognitio ne­cessaria non est, &c.. If the Scripture be compared and applied with things which faith teacheth, as necessarie to saluation, the same is appa­rently redundant, and superfluous, according to the nature of a rule: because there be many things, yea most things in the same, the know­ledge B whereof is vnnecessarie. But if the Scripture containe many [...] superfluous, and more than is needfull, it is improbable [...] thinke that it is imperfect in Principals, or deliuereth them [...] onely, or by the way.

Thirdly, the variety and multitude of points and doctrines of faith and good manners, and the often repeating and decla­ring of them in the holy Scriptures, prooueth that the Apostles [...] fully and perfectly deliuer in their writings, the whole [...] of Christian faith, and not onely cursorily touch them.

For all supernaturall veritie concerning the sacred Deitie, C Trinitie, diuine Attributes, and Operations, Creation of the world, &c. is taught in holy Scripture Aug. d. gen. ad lit l. 12. c. 33. Ab [...] diuinarū Scripturarū [...] solis de hac re [...] habenda est, rece­dere non debemus. Theophilact. Act. 1. Non aliquid [...] rerum pretermise­runt, &c.. In like manner, the whole doctrine of faith concerning the Incarnation, Person, and Office of Christ, is reuealed vnto vs by holy Scripture. And for this cause Saint Cyrill Concil. Eph. 1. apud Binium p. 692. Amb. Ser. 57. Qui vult ad Christi peruenire [...] non ingreditur ad illud [...] per [...] Scripturae secretum. Cyril. c. Iulian l. 7. p. 161. Ad sanctas conuertimur Scripturas, in quib' veritatis [...] fulget, & exacta dogmatum cognitio coaceruata est, & omne genus bonorū documentorū, quibus quis statim plenus virtute, & bonorum operū gloria conspicuus euadat. calleth the Scriptures Solos fontes veritatis, The sole fountaines of veritie. All things con­cerning Iustification, Charitie, and good workes ( Damasc. Orthod. fid. l 4. c. 18. [...], &c. being meerely supernaturall) are taught in Scripture. The doctrine of the Law, Gospell, Sacraments, resurrection of the dead, fi­nall iudgement, &c. is intirely and fully reuealed in the holy D Scriptures: and the Church, according to Saint Augustine Aug. sup. ep. Ioh. tr. 3. Est mater Ecclesia & vbera ejus duo testamenta Scripturarū diuinarum, hinc [...] lac omniū Sacramentorū temporaliter pro eterna salute nostra. &c. Don. d. Bapt. l. 3. c. 15., hath onely two brests, wherewith shee feedeth her children, to wit, the Scrip­tures of the Old and New Testament. And that he alwayes vnder­standeth by the Old and New Testament, the Scriptures of both, appeareth by his words vpon Psal. 22. Aug. sup. Psal. 22. Fratres sum', quare [...] non intesta­tus E mortu' est Pater, fecit testamentū & sic mortu' est, &c. [...] haereditate mortuorū, quamdiu [...] proferatur in publicū, & cum testamentū [...] fuerit, [...] omnes vt tabulae repetiantur, & [...], index attentè audit, aduocati silent, [...], [...], vt legantur verba mor­tui, &c. Ille sine sensu jacet in monumento, & valent verba ipsius: sedet Christ' in [...] & [...]. Aperi [...], [...] sumus, [...] noster, non [...] testameto nos dimisit pater. Aperi legamus, &c. [Page 38] Let vs open our Fathers last Testament, and reade it. And [...] A the great [...]. Hist. l. 1. c. 7. Trip. Hist. l. [...]. c. 5: [...] & Apostolice [...] nec non an­tiquorum Prophetarum [...] plane [...] de sensu Nu­minis: The Euangelicall and Apostolicall bookes, toge­ther with the Oracles of the antient Prophets, doe plainely ( [...] euidently) instruct vs, concerning the minde of God. And from all the former, it is manifest, that the Apostles wri­tings are not patches, and shreds onely of Apostolicall Do­ctrine (as our [...] against all antiquitie presumeth to af­firme) but the very substance, [...]. l. 3. c. 1. Non per alios dispositio­nem salutis nostrae [...], quam per cos per quos E­uangeliú per venit ad nos. Quod qui­dem [...] praeconia [...], [...] vero per Dei [...], in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt, sunda­mentum & colum­nam fidei nostrae suturam. Orig. praef. in Ioh. p. 161. Quae praedicauit & dixit (Paulus) haec [...] scripsit. Niceph. Hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 34. Quae presens oratione sua dilucide docue­rat (Paulus) [...] per compendium absens in memori­am [...] dedit, &c. and marrow of their whole Preaching, containing the summe of the Gospell; by faith and B obedience whereof, wee receiue euerlasting life. And thus much touching the Antecedent of the Iesuits Argument. The sequel of the former Argument, which is, Because without precedent instruction by vnwritten Tradition, wee cannot be firmely assured that wee haue the right sence of the Scripture, therefore the last and finall resolution is made vnto vnwritten Tradition, and not into Scripture, is inconsequent, and the Antecedent proueth not the Consequent: for precedent Tra­dition may bee necessarie, to deliuer vnto vs the text of holy Scripture, and Precpts how to expound and vse the same; and C by Tradition wee may receiue a Commentarie of some texts of holy Scripture: yet euen as a Schollar, although hee re­ceiue the bookes of Euclid and Aristotle from a Master, and precepts in what sort hee shall proceed in his studie, and with­all, a Commentary declaring the meaning of these Authours, yet hee doth not finally (being made learned himselfe) resolue his knowledge into the former, but into the principles of these Arts themselues: so likewise a nouice in faith receiueth the holy. Scripture by Ministerie and Tradition of the Church, and Precepts and Commentaries, whereby hee is D first inabled, and afterwards holpen in the right exposition thereof, yet after this Introduction, by further studie and dili­gence, hee collecteth Arguments from the Scripture it selfe, and being instructed in the sence thereof, he doth not finally resolue his beleefe into the Commentarie and Introduction, but into the text or Doctrine of holy Scripture it selfe.

IESVIT. E

Hence I may further inferre, that Protestants haue not throughly pondered the place of the Apostle vnto Ti­mothie, which they [...] vehemently vrge to prooue the suf­ficiencie [Page 39] of sole Scripture, for euery man, as though he had A said absolutely, that the Scriptures are able to instruct or make men wise vnto Saluation, which he saith not but speaking particularly vnto Timothie, saith, They are able to instruct or make thee wise vnto saluation, [...] [...] hast been aforehand instructed by word of mouth, and doost thereupon firmely beleeue all substantiall Doctrines, and knowest all the necessarie practise of Christian Discipline. B

ANSWER.

The Aduersarie in this passage vseth certaine Arguments to prooue that Protestants misunderstand the Text of S. Paul, 2. Timoth. 3.15, 16. when they vrge the same to maintaine the sufficiencie of sole Scripture, to be a ground for all Christians finally to rest their faith vpon.

His first Argument is, The Apostle saith not absolutely that the Scriptures are able to make all men wise vnto Saluation, but parti­cularly to Timothie, a man instructed aforehand, and formerly [...] C all substantiall grounds of Doctrine and Discipline, they are able [...] to make thee (being such a one, and so prepared) wise &c.

To this I answere, 1. That although sentences of holy Scripture are sometimes restrained to the personall or particu­lar subiect of which they are first spoken, yet this is not gene­rall; and when the same happeneth, it must be prooued by better Arguments than by the bare Emphasis of a word. For God said to Ioshua (a man qualified aboue the ordinarie ranke) I will not leaue thee nor forsake thee, Ioshua 1. 5. yet the promise implied in this Text, is generall and common to all iust per­sons, D Heb. 13.5. Our Sauiour granted ministeriall power to remit sinnes, by speciall commission to the Apostles, and de­liuering this commission to them, he breathed the holy Ghost into them, saying, Receiue yee the holy Ghost, &c. [...] 20.22. Neuer­thelesse our Aduersaries affirme, that this authority was not on­ly granted them, but to other Ministers of Christ which are not personally qualified as the Apostles were.

Secondly, if the particular circumstance of Timothie his per­son, expressed in the single word, Thee, 2. Tim. 3.15. do limit S. Pauls doctrine, concerning the Scripture, in [...] E then, where more circumstances are found in Texts con­cerning Traditions, the same may be answered as the Iesuit doth this place of S. Paules.

For example, 2. Thessal. 2.15. The Apostle saith, Therefore [Page 40] [...] stand fast, and hold the Traditions which [...] haue beene A taught, whether by word or our Epistle. In this Text so vehement­ly vrged by Papists, for vnwritten Tradition, is found a perso­nall circumstance, Tee, [...] Thessalonians which haue beene my im­mediate hearers, 1. Thess. 1. 5. and thereby are infallibly assured that the Tradition which I exhort you to hold is diuine. Also you [...], which haue not receiued as yet a perfect Canon of the New Testament in writing, I say to you, stand fast and hold both writ­ten and vnwritten Tradition.

Thirdly, admitting the Iesuits restraint, and it being gran­ted, that the Scriptures do onely make those people wise to B Saluation, which are instructed aforehand, and haue formerly beene taught the substantiall points of Christian Doctrine, yet this argueth not the insufficiencie of Scripture, to be the onely authenticall rule and ground of Faith, because the said substan­tial Doctrines which in the Apostles daies, before the Canon of the New Testament was finished, were partly contained in Scripture, and partly deliuered by their vocall preaching, were afterwards, when the Canonicall Scripture of the New Testament was finished, and the holy Apostles were de­ceased, wholly for matter of substance contained in the same C Scripture Iren. li. 4. c. 63. Apostolorum Do­ctrina &c. quae peruenit [...] ad nos, custodita sine fictione, Scripturarum tractatione plenissima, nequè addi­tamentum neque [...] recipiens & lectio sine falsatione & secundum Scripturas expositio legitima & diligens &c. [...]. 2. [...]. [...]. 9. Prome (inquit) Scripturas habes, siquid addiscere cupis, hinc poteris..

[...].

Verily the Apostle in that place speaketh onely of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, affirming them sufficient not for euery man, but for Timothie, and not sufficient D for him by themselues alone, but per fidem quae est in Christo Iesu, that is, [...] with the Doctrine of Christi­an Faith, which Timothie had heard and beleeued, vpon [...] liuely voice of Tradition.

ANSWER.

The Apostle in this place speaketh of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, but not onely. Timothie when he was a child E learned onely the Scriptures of the Old Testament, but after his childhood, he read also the Scriptures of the New, 1. Tim. 4. 16. This Epistle was written by S. Paul not long before his death, 2. Tim. 4.6. at which time the greatest part of the Canon [Page 41] of the New Testament was finished Eder. Oicon. Bib. lib. 4. pag. 482. Hanc epistolā om­nium quae scripsit Paulus esse postre­mam, & ab eo iam ex hoc mundo tr̄a­situro, Roma ex vinculis ad Timo­theum fuisse trans­missam, constans omnium ferè San­ctorum est hoc lo­co patrum [...]. Videtur emm tunc eam [...] cum esset proxim' fini: Ego enim in­quit, iam delibor & tempus resolutio­nis meae instat. Et iterum, In priore mea defēsione nul­lus mihi adstitit. Chrys. in 2. Timoth. Hom. 1. [...], &c. Ambros. Theo­dorit. Theophilact. Anselm. in Com­ment.; therefore it is not ne­cessarie A that we should restraine these words, Thou from a child hast knowne the holy Scriptures, onely to the Scriptures of the Old Testament, because Timothie, who in his youth read onely the Old Testament, in the progresse of his yeares read the New Testament also.

And although no Scripture is able to make wise to saluation, without Faith in Christ Iesus, yet this prooueth not the holy Scripture to be an imperfect Rule; because if Tradition be ad­ded to Scripture, yet both these are not able to make people wise to saluation, without Faith. Heb. 4. 2. B

But admitting, that the Apostle in the first Clause, Thou from a Child hast knowne the holy Scriptures, speaketh of the Scriptures of the Old Testament; yet adding to the same in the latter part of his speech, through Faith which is in Christ Iesus: if by Faith wee vnderstand the doctrine of Faith, reuealed in the New Te­stament, there is no materiall or necessarie part of doctrine, touching Christ Iesus, which is not contained in the Scripture. 1. Cor. 15. 1, 2, 3, 4. And this was the Tenet of the antient Ca­tholike Church, as appeareth by S. Augustine, C. Petil. Lib. 3. cap. 6. who saith: Proinde siue de Christo siue de Ecclesia, siue de C quacunque alia re, quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram, non di­cam nos nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit, licet si nos, sed om­nino quod secutus adiecit, si Angelus de Coelo vobis annunciauerit, prae­terquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus & Euangelicis accepistis Ana­thema sit. I will not say, if wee vnworthie to be compared to him that spake so; but if an Angell from Heauen shall teach any thing, either concerning Christ, or the Church, or concer­ning any other matter pertaining to Faith, or good life, besides that which you haue receiued in the Legall and Euangelicall Scriptures, let him be Anathema. D

IESVIT.

And in the consequent words of the Apostle, so much insisted vpon, All Scripture inspired of God, is profita­ble to teach, &c. And if Protestants could so metamor­phise the word Profitable, as to make it signifie the same with the word Sufficient, which is very hard; yet were E the Text much ouer-short, to prooue their intent, That Scripture alone is sufficient for euerie man, seeing the Apo­stle speakes not of euerie man, but expressely of him who [Page 42] is Homo Dei, the Man of God, that is, one alreadie A fully instructed and firmely setled by Tradition in all the maine points of Christian Faith, and godly Life, such a one as Timothie was. The Scriptures for men in this manner afore taught, and grounded in Faith, are abun­dantly sufficient, who will denie it? But this prooueth at the most the sufficiencie of the Scripture, ioyned with Tradition; not of Scripture alone, or of onely, onely, onely Scripture [...]. [...]. Def. pag. 341., as Protestants Bookes in great Letters very B earnestly affirme.

ANSWER.

S. Paul himselfe vseth both the word Profitable, Vers. 16. and the word [...], are able to make wise to saluation, which is equiualent to Sufficient, Verse 15. And Protestants alone are not the men which expound the word Profitable, by Sufficient; for both the Fathers and many learned Papists doe the like. C Vincent. Lirinensis Vincent. Lirin. Cum sit perfectus Scripturae Canon, fibique ad omnia satis superque suf­ficiat, &c., C. Haeres. cap. 2. The Canon of the Scripture is sufficient, and more than sufficient. Cyril of Alexandria Cyril. Alex. Suf­ficit Diuina Scrip­tura ad faciendum eos qui in illa edu­cati sunt sapientes & probatissimos & sufficientissimā ha­bentes intelligen­tiam, &c., C. Iulian. Lib. 7. pag. 150. The Scripture is sufficient to make them wise, which are brought vp in it, &c. Anselm. Anselm. Quae literae possunt te [...], id est sufficienter doctū reddere ad aeter­nam salutem con­sequendam. in his Commen­tarie vpon 2. Tim. 3. 16. They are able to make thee sufficiently learned, to obtaine eternall saluation. Gerson Gerson. Scrip­rura nobis tradita est tanquam regula sufficiens & infallibilis, pro regimine totius Ecclesiasistici corporis, & membrorum, vsque in finem seculi. D. Exam. Doctr. Part. 2. Consid. 1. The Scripture is giuen vs as a sufficient Rule, &c. Scotus Scot. [...] homini [...] est sufficienter tradita in [...] sacra., 1. Sent. Prol. q. 2. Supernaturall knowledge, necessarie for a wayfaring man, is sufficiently deliuered in sacred Scripture. The same is affirmed by Espencaeus Espens. Easque posse hominem ad salutem erudire & sufficienter doctum reddere., Commentar. 2. Tim. 3. 16. and D by Bonauenture Bonauent. Breuiloq. cap. 1., Occham Occham. [...]. Part. 1. [...]. 2. cap. 10., Waldensis [...]. Wald. Doctr. Fid. Lib. 2. cap. E 20., and Gabriel Aquin. 3. d. 25. art. 1., Thom. Aquinas Aquin. Com. Ioh. 21. Lect. 6. Si quis Euangelizauerit, &c. Gal. 1. 8. [...] ratio est, quia sola Canonica Scriptura est Regula Fidei. Edit. Paris. An. 1520. per Ioh. d. Porta., Lyra [...], Loc. 16. 29. Illi [...] Mosen qui docuit moralia agenda: & Propheras qui docuerunt mystica & eredenda & [...] sufficiunt ad salutem, ideo sequitur [...] illos., Durand. Durand. 3. dist 26. q. 2. n. 7. [...], in [...] sacra diffuse contineatur, &c. &c.

But the Aduersarie saith, That graunting the word (Profita­ble) did signifie Sufficient, yet S. Pauls Text still falleth short, of proouing the Scripture the onely Rule, because it is not said to be suffi­cient for all men, but for the man of God; and it is not sufficient a­lone, and by it selfe, but being ioyned with Tradition.

[Page 43] I answere first, That which is Sufficient in genere regulae, as a A Rule for the man of God, either Minister, 1. Tim. 6. 12. or o­ther spirituall man, 1. Cor. 2.15. is sufficient for all men, because there is but one common Obiect and Rule of Faith for the whole Church, and all the members thereof Alex. Hal. 3. q. 12. m. 2. ar. 3. q 2. Fides quantum ad id quod creditur, est cadem numero in omnibus sanctis qui sunt membra Ecclesiae, &c. Isio­dor d. Summ. Bon. Lib. 1. cap. 18. vtris­que maner com­munis & paruulis & perfectis., contayning strong Meat for the Learned, and Milke or plaine Doctrine for Babes. And therefore, if the Scripture be a Rule, and a sufficient Rule, it is such in common, and in respect of all peo­ple, although the manner of applying and vsing the same, may differ.

Secondly, That which is Profitable, to make the man of God B perfect, and throughly furnished to euerie good worke, is both a sufficient Rule and an onely Rule. First, it is sufficient, be­cause it makes people which receiuc it by Faith and Obedience, meet for the kingdome of God: Secondly, it is alone suffici­ent; Qui effectus pluri­bus debetur perpe­ram ascribitur vni. otherwise, this effect of making the man of God perfect, and throughly instructed, could not be ascribed to it alone, as it is manifestly done in the Apostles speech.

When two persons equally co-worke, we cannot ascribe the whole worke to one of them alone, but to both. Bread alone being one part of Food, is not sufficient to all kind of Nutri­ment. C The Apostle in the Text alledged affirming, first, That the Scripture is able to make wise vnto saluation: secondly af­firming, That [...], the whole Scripture (as Dionysius Carthu­sian expoundeth it [...]. Com. Omnis Scriptura &c. id est, tota Ca­nonica Scriptura, &c. Chrysost. 2. Tim. Hom. 9 Si quid vel discere vel ignora­re op' fit ex illis ad discemus, si argu­ere falsitatem inde hauriemus: si cor­rigi, si castigari ad exhortationem & solatium si quid desit & oporteat addipisci, ex [...] dis­cemus.) giuen by inspiration, is profitable to teach, confute, instruct, reproue; and then declaring the great­nesse of the vtilitic, which is, to make the man of God perfect, and throughly instructed to euerie good worke Oecumen. [...].: This effect cannot be ascribed to a partiall cause, neither can the Apostle meane, that the whole Scripture is profitable, or sufficient onely as one part of Diuine Reuelation, but because it containeth the D whole Rule of Faith.

If any shall pretend, That the Scripture is not sufficient of it selfe to these effects, because Diuine Grace, Ecclesiasticall Mi­nisterie, Docilitie in the Hearer or Reader, are necessarie (toge­ther with the Scripture) to make the man of God perfect; they must vnderstand, that our question is, Whether holy Scripture alone be a sufficient rule of Faith? Not whether other adiu­uant causes be necessarie for the receiuing and applying there­of, that it may produce Faith. The Earth is sufficient to bring forth food for man, Gen. 1. 29. although Husbandmen and E Grasiers be necessarie. Manna, Quailes, and the water flowing from the Rocke, were sufficient to feed the children of Israel in the Desart; yet Bakers and Cookes were necessarie to prepare and dresse this food, Exod. 16.6.24. Sap. 16.21. Euen so, the [Page 44] holy Scripture is sufficient, as a Rule, to teach all Doctrine ne­cessarie A for our spirituall nourishment, although the Ministerie of man, and Diuine Grace, be needfull also, that wee rightly vse the same. If the Obiection were good, to wit, Holy Scripture is not the onely Rule, because by it alone, without Diuine Grace and Ecclesiasticall Ministerie, &c. wee cannot beleeue, then Tradition and holy Scripture being conioyned, to make vp the Rule of Faith, the same will yet be insufficient, because without Diuine Grace, Ecclesiasticall Ministerie, and Docilitie in the people, neither Scripture nor Tradition can produce Faith. B

IESVIT.

Hence also we may conclude that the many allegations of Fathers, which Protestants bring to prooue the Scrip­ture to be cleere in all substantiall points, are impertinent, because the Fathers speake of men aforehand instructed in all substantiall points, who may by the light of Tradition easily discouer in Scripture, as they that heard Aristotle explicate himselfe by word of mouth, may vnderstand his C Booke of Nature, most difficill to bee vnderstood of them that neuer heard his explication, either out of his owne mouth, or by Tradition of his schollers.

ANSWER.

Out of your owne fancies you may conclude what you please: but from the Fathers nothing can be concluded, repug­nant to that which Protestants hold, concerning the perspicui­ty D of sacred Scripture, euen in it selfe. Ireneus saith Iren. lib. 2. c. 46. Vniuersae Scriptu­rae Propheticae & Euangelicae, in a­perto & sine ambi­guitate, & similitèr ab omnibus audiri possunt., All the Scrip­tures both Propheticall and Euangelicall, are cleere without ambiguity, and may indifferently bee heard of all men. S. Hierom Hieron. super Esa. cap. 19. Mos est Scripturarū obscu­ris manifesta sub­nectere., It is the manner of the Scripture to ioine that which is manifest to such things as are obscure. S. Cyril Cyril. c. Iulian. lib. 7. p. 60. Vt omnibus essent nota paruis & magnis, vtilitèr familiari sermone commen­data E sunt vt nullius captum transcendant., That they may be knowne of all people both small and great, they are profitably commended vnto vs in a famili­ar kind of speaking, that they may exceed the capacitie of none. S. Augustine Aug. ad Volus. Ep. 3. & d. verb. Ap. Serm. 13. & d. vtil. Cred. c. 6. & sup. Psal. 88. Eder. [...]. Bibl. lib. 1. p. 52. Media inter [...] duo veluti extrema sententia D. est August. Epist. ad Volus. Vbi literas sacras non quidem vsquè adeò difficiles esse, quin ex ijs studio & diligentia tantum quisquè possit assequi quantum ci ad salutem, vtile sit atquè necessarium., Plaine places are found in them to expound and open the darke and hard. S. Gregorie Greg. Praefat. Iob. ad Leandr. ca. 4. Habet in publico vndè paruulos nutriat, &c., The Scripture hath so much in [Page 45] open [...] as may feed little ones. S. Chrysoft. Chrys. d. verb. Eia. Hom. 2. Scrip­turae non sunt me­ralla quae indigent operarijs, sed the­saurū praebent pa­ratum [...] qui quae­runt opes in [...] reconditas. Satis est enim introspex­isse vt omni expleti fructu [...]. Satis est [...] a­peruisse vt illicò videas gemmarum splendorem. [...]. d. Sum. Bon. li. 1. [...]. 18. Simplices inue­niunt modicos in­tellectus ad quos ipsi humiles refu­giunt. [...]. Ex­plic. Euang. Lectio­nis sacrae [...] imbecillis bacculū meruosis arma mi­nistrat, &c. Acost. d. Christ. Reuel. lib. 2. cap. 2. Ita prouidit dulcis pater vt mul­ta sint in sacris li­teris aperta, histo­rica, [...], &c. At­què hoc est in diui­na Scriptura om­ninò mirabile, ne­minē esse tàm ru­dem & imperitum quin si humilitèr legat multa illic v­tilia veraquè intel­ligat., Scriptures are [...] A like mettals, which haue need of workemen to digge them out, but they deliuer a treasure readie at hand, for them which seeke hidden riches in them. It is sufficient to looke into them, that you may depart repleni­shed with all fruit, it is sufficient onely to open them, that you may pre­sently behold the splendor of their pearles. And although the anti­ent Fathers do many times referre people to Tradition Cassandr. Def. D lib. d. Offic. Bon. viri, pa. 820. Intelligentia Scripturae quae ex Traditione percipitur, non est ab ipsa. Scriptu­ra seperanda, cum in [...] continentur vel tanquam definitio in definito vel tanquam [...] in [...]. Cum [...] huic seu Traditioni Cathol. seu [...], non scripta authoritas in [...] dijudicatione [...], nihil ipsi Scripturae subtrahitur, cum nihil aliud sit quam mens & intelligentia Scripturae antiquitus nobis tradi­ta quae vt scripta non sit in eis tamen quae sctipta sunt continetur. espe­cially in three cases: First, For the testifying of the number and integritie of the Bookes of Canonical Scripture: Second­ly, For the cleering of some hard or ambiguous Texts of Scrip­ture, from the new and forged expositions of Heretickes: B Thirdly, For externall rites and ceremonies: yet neither the Fathers, nor the more learned Papists themselues [...]. [...]. Com. sup. Genes. [...]. C. Luther, at. 18. Abul. Defens. part. 2. ca. 18. pa. 39. [...] 22. q. 1. [...]. [...], pag. 38. [...]. 4. d. 5. q. 1. [...]. 1., do hold that there is a large and general Commentarie of all the Scriptures, or of all the difficill places thereof, receiued from the Apo­stles, and preserued vntill our daies; neither doe the Fathers [...]. Lir. c. Haer. cap. 39. Quae tamen antiquorum patrum sententia non in omnibus diuinae [...], sed solùm certè praecipuè, in fidei regula magno nobis studio & [...] est & [...]. [...] ca. 41. Vt ad vnam Ecclesiastici sensus regulam Scripturae caelestis intelligentia [...], in [...] praecipuè quae­stionibus quibus totius Catholici Dogmatis [...] nitantur. hold, that people cannot read the holy Scripture with profit, or collect the true meaning of them in points substantiall and necessarie, without such a Commentarie.

First, If such a Commentarie were extant, it must be found in the elder Fathers, Tertullian, Ireneus, Origen, &c. But the Pa­pists C themselues Ioh. Picus. Mirand. Apol. q. 1. Ego hoe dico & firmitèr assero, non valere istam consequentiam, [...] est contrà Aug. [...]. Greg. [...], Ergo est haeretica. Quamuis [...] sanctorum Doctorum Scriptura extrà Canonem Bibliae [...], fit habenda & legenda & non tamèn sunt [...] dicta, ità firmae authoritatis & immobilitatis, vt eis contradicere non liceat. will not alwaies be tied to their Expositi­ons, as appeareth by their forsaking of Tertullian in the Expo­sition of the wordes of the Gospell, Hoc est corpus meum Greg. Val. tom. 4. pag. 1073., This is my bodie; and by their forsaking of Origen Orig. sup. Math. tract. 1. In vnoquoquè perfecto habente congregationem eorum E qui complent [...], verborum, factorum, & sensuum, est quae à Deo aedificatur Ecclesia. Quod si super vnum illum Petrum tantum existimas aedificatam totam Ecclefiam, quid dicturus es de Iohanne filio [...], & Apostolorum vnoquoquè. Vide Genebrard. Collectam in Orig. in many of his Expositions; and againe of Tertullian Tertul. d. pudicit. cap. 21. Si quia dixerit Petro dominus, super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, & [...] praesumis, adte deriuasse [...] & aligandi potestatem, id est ad [...] Ecclesiam [...], qualis es [...] atquè commutans mani­festam domini [...], &c. Read [...] in [...] [...]. n. 186. Censuring and condemning this Exposition. in his Expositi­on of Math. 16. 17.

Secondly, The Exposition of Scripture, giuen by the Fa­thers, is many times repugnant, and different each of them from other, as Sixtus Senensis in his Bibliotheca, and Cardinall [Page 46] [...] in his Commentaries, and other Pontificians doe shew, [...] in Gen. l. 3. c. 2. q. 5. [...]. in 1. p. Tho. disput. 8. p-49. [...]. an. 34. n. 213. [...] [...]. l. 11. c. 6. [...]. c. Caje­tan. Gillius com. Theol. d. [...]. & d. Deo. l. 1. tr. 7. c. 11. [...]. loc. l. 5. c. 3. [...]. [...]. Quest. in 1. sent. q. 5. A but if there had beene a large and generall Commentarie of Scripture, or of all, or most of the harder places of Scripture, the antient Fathers, [...] nearest vpon the Apostles, must haue knowne and followed that, and so could neither haue er­red in exposition, nor differed one for the other.

Thirdly, the Fathers affirme; that the Scripture expounds it selfe; Aug. d. verb. [...]. Serm. 2. Aug. Ipsa ver­ba Euangelica se­cum portant expo­sitiones suas. Idem. d. doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 6. Nihil ferè de illis obscuritatibus eruitur, quod non [...] dictum alibi reperitur. & d. vnit. Eccles. c. 5. p. 427. Chrys. sup. Gen. Hom. 13. Chrys. Sacra Scriptura seipsam [...]. Basil. l. 2. d. Bapt. Eorum quae ab ipso dicta sunt ex his quae in alio loco dicta sunt ve­ritatem ac salutare discamus. Greg. sup. Ezech. Hom. 7. Di­uina eloquia, cum legente [...] nam [...] illa quis (que) [...] intel­ligit, [...] in eis alti' [...]. Acost. d. Christ. Reuel. l. 3. c. 21. Nihil mihi vi­detur sic [...], vt [...]. [...]; diligens, attenta, frequens [...] tum medita­tio & collatio Scrip­turarū, omniū [...] regula, ad intelligendū semper est visa, nam ex alijs Scripturis aliae optimè intelliguntur: tum phrasis ipsa, tum [...] familiaris [...] vt assuetis jam [...] intelligcntia pateat. Ita (que) obscurā aperta, dubiā certa interpretātur. E And they doe not alwayes referre men to Tradition, concerning exposition of Scripture, but pre­scribe other rules and meanes also. Aug. d, Doctr. Christ. l. 4. c. 30. B &c. Chrys. sup. Gen. Hom. 21. & sup. Rom. Hom. 13. & sup. Iohn Hom. 39. Tertul. c. prax. Hilar d. Trinit. l. 5. Ambros. [...]. Psal. 118. Serm. 8. Origen. Mat. Hom. 25.

Fourthly, that which the Aduersarie affirmeth touching the Fathers, to wit, that they held the Scriptures to be cleare in all substantiall points, onely to men beforehand instructed, by the light of Tradition, is vntrue; neither doe the Fathers speake of Tradition according to the Romish acceptation.

First, sometimes the Fathers exhort heathen men, which were not instructed by Tradition, to reade the Scriptures. Theo­philus C Antiochenus saith to Autolicus, [...]. [...]. Tom. 1. p. 898. l. 1. ad [...]. being as then a Pagan, Ve­rum tu ipse si placet consule liter as sacras: But doe thou thy selfe if it seeme good vnto thee, consult with the holy Scriptures. Also they prouoke Heretikes, which denied the Tradition of the Church, to examine truth by Scriptures: August. d. vnit. Ec­cles. c. 2.3.16. & contra Maxim. Arrian. l. 3. c. 14. Socrates Hist. lib. 1. cap. 6.

Secondly, by Tradition they vnderstand not the fabulous dreames and inuentions of Papals, Gerson. d. fig. Ruin. Eccl. sig. 8. Fabulae sunt & non sanae Doctrinae, &c. Idem. d. spir. vit. anim. l. 2. Has vero Traditiones hominum quis cunctas dinumeret in Canonibus summorū pontificum in constitutionibus Synodalibus prouinciarum aut Diocesium, in Religionum regulis. [...]. Bacon. l. 3. sent. [...]. who like the Pharisees cor­rupt the right sence of Scripture, by their vnwritten Traditi­ons, D and affirme those things to bee Apostolicall, which agree with the confessed Doctrine of the Apostles, like darkenesse with light: But the Fathers by Tradition, vnderstand such ex­position of Scripture, as was vniformely receiued, and com­mended for Apostolicall, by the Primatiue Church, and which besides antiquitie, or the report of men, appeared to bee Apo­stolicall, by an exact harmonie and consent with the Text of the holy Scripture, to which it was applied. S t. August. Aug. Quod autem nos admonet vt ad fontem recurramus, id est ad Apostolicā Traditionē & in­de [...] in nostra tempora dirigamꝰ, optimū est & sine dubitatione faciendū. Traditū est ergo nobis sicut ipse comemorat Apostolꝰ, quod sit vnus Christus & vnꝰ Deus & vna spes, & vna fides, & vna Ecclesia & Baptisma vnū. d. [Page 47] Bapt. c. Donatist. l.5, c.26. S t. Cyprian. Epist. 74. Tertul. d. prae­script. c.21. Ruffin. Hist. Ecclesiast. l.2. c.9. A

IESVIT.

I hope I haue in the opinion of your most learned Maie­stie, sufficiently demonstrated the first ground of Catho­licke faith, to wit, that a Christian is originally and funda­mentally built vpon the word of God, not as written [...] Scriptures, but as deliuered by the Tradition of the Church, B successiuely from the Primatiue, vpon the authority where­of we beleeue, that both Scriptures and all other substan­tiall Articles of Faith were deliuered by the Apostles, thence further ascending and inferring they came from Christ, and so from God the prime veritie and Authour of truth.

ANSVVER. C

You haue played the Paralogist, and weaued a spiders web, which is fitter to catch flyes, than to persuade so religious, lear­ned, iudicious, and resolute a king, who is like an Angell of God, know­ing good and euill. Your obiections being weighed in the bal­lance of the Sanctuarie, are found light, they are Funiculus va­nitatis, a coard and bundle of vanitie, a potsheard couered ouer with the drosse of siluer. His most learned Maiestie (as you truly stile him) honoureth genuine and Orthodox all Tradition, as no re­ligious king, or good Christian can doe more, and hereupon, to D wit, vpon the testimony of Tradition (besides other Argu­ments) he beleeueth that you and your consorts are deceiued, [...]. [...] Tom. 1. an. 53. n. 11. Greg. Val. To. 3. p. 347. Posseu. [...]. 1. 2. c. 25. [...]. loc. 3. when you hold that a Christian is originally and fundamen­tally built vpon the word of God, not as written in Scripture, but as deliuered by Tradition, &c. For if the Scripture, accor­ding to the doctrine and Tradition of the Primatiue Church, is eminentissimae authoritatis Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. Fid. vol. 3. disp. 15. c. 12. Respondeo vere ac jure authoritatem Scripturae, praelatā omninò efse autho­ritati Ecclesiae, tanquam verbum Dei, omni alio verbo creato, etiam irrefragabili, quia longe majus est Deum per seipsum loqui, quam [...] Ecclesiae infallibiter loquenti, [...] dirigere ne aberret. p. 101. col. 2. [...] praef. prol. sup. 1. sent. Scientia sacrae Scripturae habet prae caeteris dignitatem eminentiae, quasi [...]. Sicut enim principium dignius est alijs propositionibus in scientia, vnde & dignitas [...]: sic recte [...] scien­tia [...] est, & inter ipsas [...] principatum. of most eminent authoritie: If it be the seed, of which faith is first of all conceiued: if it is the Rocke, whereupon the Church is built: if the authoritie of vn­written Tradition dependeth vpon it, and must bee examined E [Page 48] by it. If the Churches authoritie is [...] from it, then a A Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon it.

First, That which is most excellent in euery kind, is the mo­dell and paterne of all the rest Aristot. Me­taph. li. 2. cap. 2. A­quin. p. 3. q. 56. ad. 3. Sempèr id quod est [...], est exemplat [...] quod est minus [...], secundum eius mo­dum. but I trow you will grant the Scripture to be the most excellent part of Gods word Card. [...]. In Vesper. Re­com. Script. In cu­ius montis vertice, Christus suum ha­bitaculum praedis­ponens ibi Eccle­siae suae fundamen­tum posuit & in al­tissimo veritatis [...], sacrae scrip­turae veritate, fun­dauit ipsam., 2. Pet. 1. [...]. S. [...] c. [...]. Manich. li. 11 cap. 5. & d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 11. cap. 3. & Ibid. [...]. 14. cap. 7. & d. Vnit. Eccles. Aug. d. vnit. Eccles. ca. 16. Haec sunt causae nostrae [...], hec sun­damenta, haec fir­mamenta. Legimus in Actibus Aposto­lorum dictum de quibusdā credenti­bus quod quotidiè scrutarentur Scrip­turas, an haec ita se haberent. Quas ita­què Scripturas nisi Canonicas legis & Prophetarum? Huc accesserunt [...] Apostolicae [...], Actus Apostolorū, Apocal Iohannis, scrutami­ni haec omnia & eruite aliquid manifestum quo demonstretis Ecclesiam. 16. Chris. d. [...]. Hom. 4. Oecumen. sup. 2. Tim. 3. Ansel. sup. 2. Tim. 3.

Secondly, A Christian is fundamentally built vpon the rock, but the Scripture is a rocke. Cardinalis Camaracensis [...]. vespert. [...]. sacrae Scripturae Card. Camerac. Sacra Scriptura D Christi testimonijs in [...] fundata spiritualitèr intelligi potest, illa firma petra supra quam aedificata est Ec­clesia. Idem. In quolibet aedificio rationabilitèr ordinato, primò praecedit fundatio, secundò procedit aedificatio, [...] succedit consummatio, hoc igitur modo [...] omnium [...], super Scripturae sacrae petram [...] suam aedificauit. Idem. Christus Dei virtus & Dei sapientia Ecclesiae suae domum quam interna mente concepit, super sacrae Scripturae fundamentum temporali aedificatione compleuit. Chrys. Math. Hom. 46. Hieru­salem hic semper Ecclefiam intellige, quae dicitur ciuitas pacis cujus sundamenta posita sunt super montes Scrip­turarum., In euery building orderly framed, the foun­dation B hath precedence, then followeth superedification, and lastly con­summation. According to this order, Christ the most exact Architect did build his Church vpon the rocke of holy Scripture.

Thirdly, The seed of Faith is the root and foundation of [...] Christian, the Scripture is the seed of Faith Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 19. ca. 18. Credit Scripturis Sanctis veteribus & nouis, quas Canonicas appellamus, vnde fides ipsa concepta est, qua [...] viuit. ( Iohn 20. 41.) for it is the word of God, Luc. 8.11. Iam. 1.18. 1. Cor. 4, 15. And were the Popish Tenet true, that the Scripture is not the whole word of God, but only a part thereof, yet a Chri­stian must be originally and fundamentally built vpon it, toge­ther with Tradition Vinc. Lir. c. Haer. ca. 1. Duplici modo munire fidem, primo scilicet Diuinae legis authoritate deindè Catholicae Ecclesiae Traditione. Ib. c. 41. And Tradition according to the Tenet of C our Aduersarie in this place, cannot be the sole foundation of Christianitie, but only a part of the foundation.

Fourthly, All Scripture giuen by diuine Inspiration is sim­ply and without exception to be receiued: and all Tradition repugnant to Scripture is to be refused Basselis. Praef. prol. sup. 1. sent. Scriptura est veritas aliarum exemplaris, &c.. From hence it fol­loweth, that Scripture is a rule of Tradition, and not Tradition of Scripture; and Scripture is the highest rule (as both the Fathers Athan. d. Synod. [...]. Et Se­leuc. pa. 673. Hieron. sup. Galath. ca. 1. and many Papists Aug. Triumph. d. Pot. Ecclef. q. 100. ar. 1. Primum locum autho­ritatis tenet Scriptura veteris & noui Testamenti. Andrad. Def. li. 2. pa. 171. Neminem inficiare diuinorum [...] cognitionem ex [...] literis [...] petendam [...], illasquè imprimis consulendas, cum res [...] in [...] questionemquè vocatur &c. Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. Fid. vol. 3. Dub. 18. ca. 14. Vndè com­paratione E hujus (Scripturae) testimonium Ecclesiae, dici quodammodò potest testimonium hominum [...] quod in rigore Sermonis non obtinet proprietates & [...] ad rationem verbi Dei, & proindè respectu etiàm illius intelligi potest id quod a beato Iohanne scriptum est [...] hominum accipitis, testimonium Deimajus est. [...] c. 15. Testimonium Scripturae in seipso [...] & [...] est quam testimonium [...] quià illud ab intrinseco est verbum Dei, hoc vero ab [...]. Caiet. d. Author. Pap. & Concil. p. 2. ca. 4. & Apolog. c. [...]. ca. 23. ad. 5. themselues affirme) and thus it is [Page 49] certaine, that a Christian is orignally and fundamentally built A vpon the holy Scripture.

IESVITS 2 d, Ground.

That there is a visible Church alwaies in the world, to whose Traditions men are to cleaue, and the Church is one Vniuersall, Apostolicall, Holy.

ANSWER. B

The subiect of this Proposition, to wit, Ecclesia, the Church is a word or terme of diuers significations Suar. d. Fid. disp. 5. sect. 6. Eccle­siae nomen varias habet significatio­nes. Card. Monilian. Theol. Instit. Com­pend. c. 34. Ne labo­remus in [...] est de sin­gulis [...] signi­ficatis. [...]. Sum. d. Ecclel. lib. 1. cap. 2. [...]. Quest. Vesp. Recom. Scrip. cap. 3. d. 2. Gabriel. Can. Miss. lect. 21. & lect. 75. Occham. Dialog. p. 1. li. 1. c. 4., and therefore the Iesuit should haue declared in what notion he taketh the same, when he saieth, There is a visible Church, &c. First Car­dinall Bellarmine Bellarm. d. Eccles. lib. 3. ca. 2. Ecclesia est caetus [...] fidei Christianae [...], & [...] Sacramentorum communione colligatum, sub regimine [...] pastorum, ac praecipuè [...] Christi in [...] Vicarij Romani [...]. Tres sunt partes [...]: professio verae fidei: Sacramentorum communio & subiectio ad [...] Pastorem Rom. Pontificem., with other Pontificians Greg. [...]. Analys. fid. li. 6. ca. 1. Martin. Eisengren. li. d. Eccles. Cath. ca. 1., saith, that the Church whereof he disputes, is a companie of people linked together by the same profession of Faith, and Communion of Sacraments vnder lawfull pastros, [...] vnder the Roman Bishop, who is Christs Vicar. C

Secondly, The terme (Church) is taken in the holy Scripture for the vniuersall number of holy beleeuers in all ages; and more strictly, for the whole number of holy beleeuers vnder the New Testament, Heb. 12.23. Apoc. 5.9. Ephes. 5.25.27. D and thus it comprehendeth both the Church Militant, and Triumphant Aug. [...]. c. 56. Quae tota hic accipienda est, non solú ex parte qua [...] terris, &c. Verum etiam ex illa quae in coelis, &c. Templú Dej hoc est totius summae illius Trinitatis sancta est Ecclesia, [...], vniuersa in Coelo & in terra Id. sup. Psalm. 56. Nec [...] quae [...] est in hominibus qui presentem vitam agunt, sed ad eam [...], etiam his qui fuerunt antè [...], & futuri sunt post nos vsquè ad [...] Seculi. Id. sup. Psal. 90. conc. 2. Orig. in [...]. Hom. 2. Greg. Mor. li. 28. c. 6. & in Psal. 5. Paenit. [...]. Resol. li. 4. c. 14. n. 10..

Thirdly, the Church is taken for the common and vniuersall multitude of Christian people, of any one or more ages, which are baptised, and externally professe Christianitie. And accor­ding E to this notion, it comprehendeth both the good and the bad, the cleane and the vncleane Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei li. 18. cap. 49. & sup. [...]. tr. 6. & d. V­nit. Eccles. c. 13. [...]. Ep. 51. & Ep. 52. Hieron. c. Luci­fer. [...]. d. Fid. ad Petr. ca. 43. [...]. Naz. c. Iulian. Orat. 1. 1. [...]. d. Sacer. li. 3. Greg. in [...] Hom. 11. Chrysolog. Serm. 47. Franc. Pic. Mirand. Theor. 13. of that profession, 2. Tim. 2. 20. Math. 13.25.47. Math. 3.12. &c. 22.10.

[Page 50] [...], it is taken for Particular Societies, and congregations A of Christians, Apoc. 1.4. & 2.1. and sometimes it is taken for the Pastors of particular Churches, Math. 18.17. sometimes for the People, Acts 20.28. sometimes for the whole Flocke, consisting of Pastors and People cyprian. Epist. 69. Illi sunt Eccle­fia, plebs Sacerdoti adunita & pastori suo grex adhaerens., Apoc. 3.6. But it is neuer taken in holy Scripture for the Pope and Councell camer. Quest. Vesp. Recom. script. p. 278. Gabriel. sup. Can. Miss. lect. 75.. If the Iesuit in his Proposition, There is a visible Church alwaies in the world, &c. understand the [...] (Church) in the first Notion, then it is de­nied that we are absolutely to adhere to the Traditions of this Church, or that the same is alwaies and intirely, One, Vniuersal, Apostolicall, Holy, according to the meaning of the Apostles, B and Nicene Franc. Picus, Theor. 4. In Sym­bolo edito Nicece, &c. [...]. Creed.

Secondly, according to the second Notion, the Church is not visible, for a principall part thereof is in heauen, and the other moetie militant vpon earth, being considered as elect and holy, is knowne intuitiuely to God only, 2. Tim. 2.19. and mo­rally, coniecturally, and according to the iudgement of Chari­tie to men in this world, 2. Thess. 2.13. Tertul. d. prae­script. c. 3. Tu vt ho­mo [...] vnumquenquè nosti, putas quod vides, Vides autem quousquè oculos habes. Sed oculi [...] C alti. Homo in faciem Deus in praecordia contemplatur. Et ideo cognoscit Dominus qui sunt eius, &c. Cusan. Con­cord. Cath. li. 1. ca. 4. Nullum est iudicium certum, de membris Ecclefiae, nisi in modò renatis infantibus.

Thirdly, according to the third Notion, the Church is visi­ble in all ages, and some part thereof teacheth and professeth right Faith in all substantiall and fundamentall articles. And we are to cleaue to the Traditions of the same, so farre as in the deliuerie thereof it exceedeth and transgresseth not the bounds of lawfull authoritie [...]. 2. d. 44. q. 3. nu. 9. Eccle­sia licet habet in terris dominationé Dei illa tamen non excedit limitationé Scripturae., and teacheth according to the rule of Gods word. S. Chrysostome saith, Because Seducers are often found even in true Churches, we are not to beleeue, vnlesse they D speake and do that which is consonant to the Scriptures Chrys. imperf­in Math. 49. Nec ip­fis [...] (Eccle­sijs) oredendum est, nisi ea dicant vel faciant quae conue­nientia sunt Scrip­turis.. And in another place Id. in 2. Tim. Hom. 2. Plus aliquid dicam, ne paulò quidem [...] fi quid [...], fi quid humamam, sed Apo­stolo Christum in fe loquentem circumferenti. E, [...]. If the Priest teach any peruerse Doctrine, giue no credit, yea though he were an Angell. Nay I will presume to say more than this, [...], one ought not beleeue Paul, if he should preach any thing humane, or of himselfe, but as he is an Apostle, and hath Christ speaking in him.

Lastly, according to the fourth Acceptation, there are euer in the world particular Churches and societies of Christians, and euery one of these Churches professe some portion of di­uine veritie. But we must enquire by the rule of Gods word, [Page 51] which of these are pure and orthodoxall, and on the contra­rie, A which of them are infected with errors Hilar. in Matth. Canon. 8. Ecclesiae inter quas verbum Der non [...] Ora. 1. c. Arrian. Bonum est, vel potius necessarium, optare gratiam discerquos abijcere, vt [...] cognoscat, secudum Ioannis Praeceptum (1. [...]. 4. 1.) quos abijcere, [...] vt amicos, & qui ciusdem naturae [...], recipere [...]., and imbrace the Doctrine of the one, and auoid the Corruptions of the other.

Remarkable Obseruations concer­ning the Church.
OBSERVATION I. B

THe externall visible Church is an intermixed August. d. [...]. Christ. Lib. 3. [...]. [...]. de corpore Domini vero atque [...], &c. or com­pounded societie, bodie, and state of Christian people professing the faith and worship of Christ, in which are found sheepe and goats, wheat and tares, gold and drosse, good fishes and bad, and vessels of honour and dishonour.

This common and generall societie and bodie consisteth of diuers particular Churches, consenting and agreeing in the professing of some part of diuine veritie: and of these Chur­ches some are orthodoxall, some are impure in faith and religi­on, C and also these being compared are respectiuely purer or im­purer. And within the compasse of each particular Church the members are better or worse, more or lesse holy or corrupt.

OBSERVAT. II.

Whereas the Church hath many Titles and Properties be­longing to it, and Christ Iesus the Head thereof hath made sun­drie Promises, and conferred diuerse Graces vpon it; wee must consider, which part of the Church is the proper subiect of these Qualities, Promises, and Graces August. Praef. in Psal. 47. Secundam Sabbathi non debe­mus intelligere nisi Ecclesiam Christi, sed Ecclesiā Christi in sanctis, Ecclesiam Christi in hijs qui scripti [...] in [...], Ecclesiam Christi in hijs qui tentati­onibus mundi non cedunt. Ipsi enim digni sunt nomine firmamenti. Ergo Ecclesia Christi in hijs qui firmi sunt, de quibus dicit Apostolus, debemus autem nos firmi infirmitatem infirmortum suftinere, Rom. 15. appellata est firmamentum. Tho. [...]. 10. 1. h. 2. E ar. 2. c. 11. Vocabula summx laudis & excellentiae tituli quamuis indistinctè per Scriptturas de tota [...] Ec­clesia tamen de sola gloriofa parte eius debent intelligi. Aug. c. Don. li. 5. ca. 27. Quod in Cant. Cantic. Ecclesia sic describitur, Hortus conclusus, [...] mea sponsa, sons [...], puteus aquae vinae, Paradisus cum cum fructu pomorum, hoc intelligere non audeo, nisi in iustis & sanctis. Bernard. sup. Cantic. Ser. 68. Et quid sponsa, [...] congre­gatio [...]? quid ipsa, [...] generatio [...] Dominum, [...] sponfi?: For it is apparant, That D as Sheepe and Goats, Chaffe and Wheat, Gold and Drosse, are of a contrarie kind, although they are intermixed; so likewise the Affections and Attributes of the same, although they are spoken in generall of the whole Subiect (as an Heape which hath Wheat and Chaffe, a Field which hath Wheat and Tares, are called an Heape of Graine, a Field of Wheat) yet many of them appertaine formally, and indeed, onely to the better part of the common Subiect.

OBSERVAT. III. A

In the visible societie of Christian people, there are found (according to S. Augustine Aug. [...]. Psal. 61. [...] d. Doctr. [...]. [...]. 3. c. 37. Est enim ipse (Dia­bolus) caput impi­orum, qui sunt erus quodammodo cor­pus, ituri cum illo in supplieium ae­terni ignis: Sicut Christus caput est Ecclesiae, quae est corpus [...] cum illo in regno & gloria sempiterna. B) Citizens of the heauenly Hieru­salem, and also Inhabitants of Babylon. And (as the same Fa­ther teacheth) Notum est ciues malae Ciuitatis, administrare quos­dam actus, [...] Ciuitatis: It is manifest, that (in the visible Church) Burgers of the wicked Citie Babylon, doe administer some Functions of the holy Citie Hierusalem. Ioh. 12.6. 2. Ti­moth. 4.10. Apoc. 3.14, 15. Phil. [...]). Ioh. 3.9.

The Promises of Christ made to the Church concerning his August. Ioh. tr. 11. Quomodo in [...], non obfuit illis [...] de ancillis nati [...], quo min' tenerent regnum, & terram promissi­onis cum fratribus, ex [...] acciperent non illis obsuerant natales ancillarum sed praeualuit semé paternum: sic qui­cunque per malos C baptizantur, tanquam de ancillis videntur nati, tamen quia ex [...] verbi Dei quod figuratur in Iacob, simul cum fratribus haredittatem [...]. August. ibid. tr. 5. Spiritualis virtus Sacramenti ita est vt lux, ab illuminandis pura accipitur, & si per [...] transeat, non [...]. Idem, ep 3. ad [...]. tants est diuina potentia gratiae vt per malos acquirat bonos, & per reprobos & improbos, acquirat & colligat probos. Idem, contra Parmen. Lib. 2. cap. 8. Verba bona quae pro populo dicuntur in precibus, etiamsi a malis dicantur, Episcopis exaudiuntur tamen non pro peruersitate praepositorum sed pro deuotione populorum. cbrysof. sup. Ioh. Hom. 85. & sup. 1. [...]. Hom. 8. pag. 383. Scot. 4. d. 5. -d. 1. presence and assistance, to his Word and Sacraments, preached and administred according to his commandement, are fulfilled, when wicked persons execute the office, and performe the worke of outward [...]. For although wicked persons, like the Carpenters of Noahs Arke, reape no benefit to them­selues, yet God Almightie concurreth with their Ministerie (being his owne Ordinance) for the saluation of all deuout and worthie Communicants.

OBSERVAT. IIII.

Some things are spoken of the Church in common, or gene­rall tearmes, to shew what the whole is in respect of Gods out­ward D vocation, or what the office and dutie of the whole Church is: but the same promises, properties, and priuiledges are really fulfilled or found in the better and sounder part there­of onely [...]. Lapid. [...]. [...]. ca. 2. v. 4. [...] vel Ecclesiae promittit, quantumuis amplis & vniuersalibus verbis, id tamen de [...] cum Deo promittente & paciscente seruant intelligendum esse. [...]. 71..

When our Sauiour promiseth, that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against the Church ( Matth. 16.18.) he vnderstan­deth such a Church as heareth and obeyeth his word [...]. d. [...]. 3. E Obiect, Lex & [...] Dei absoluta insallibiliter [...] non sit dispositio ex parte nostra [...]. 16. 17. & 28. 20. &c. Resp. [...] est [...] solum in [...] decretis dei dei absolutis, super co quod [...] est sine nobis, vel sine [...] actionum [...], non est aurem [...] antecedens in his [...], etiamsi sint acti­ons publicae, siue communes Papae & [...] in [...], [...] tales promissiones intelliguntur quod implebuntur secundum nostram dispositionem., and not [Page 53] a visible companie or Hierarchie of Prelates, which forsake his A word, and doe what they list. August. d. Vnit. Ecclesiae, cap. 18. Ecclesia in his est qui adificant supra Petram, id est qui credunt ver­bum Christi, & faciunt, & d. Baptismo, Lib. 6. cap. 24. Nonne illi sunt in Ecclefia, qui sunt in Petra? Qui autem in Petra non sunt, nec in Ecclesia sunt, iam ergò videamus, vtrum super Petram aedifici­um suum constituant, qui audiunt Christi verba & non faciant. Saint Augustine in these words deliuereth three things: first, The Church is in them which build vpon the Rocke: secondly, They are not in the Church, which are not in the Rocke: third­ly, They onely build vpon the Rocke, and are in the Rocke, B which beleeue and obey the word of Christ Orig. in [...]. Hom. 1. Petra est omnis qui imitator est Christi & super omnes [...], aedificatur Ecclesia Dei. Aug. c. Don. Lib. 3. cap. 18. Petra tenet, Petra dimittit, columba tenet, columna di­mittit, vnitas tenet, vnitas dimittit, pax autem huius vnitatis in solis bonis est, vel iam spirituahbus, vel ad spi­ritualia concordi vnitate, proficientibus, [...] malis, autem non est, &c. Ibid. Lib. 6. cap. 3. & Lib 7. cap. 51. Idem d. vnit. Eccles. cap. 16. Ego ipsam Ecclesiam requiro vbi sit, quae audiendo verba Christi, & faciendo aedificat supra Petram.. And this Do­ctrine of S. Augustine is taken out of the holy Scripture. Matth. 7.24. 1. Cor. 3.11. & 10.4.

Also when S. Paul saith, The Church is the ground and pillar of Truth Hieron. Sup. [...]. 26. Ipsa Eccle­sia quae est sancto­rum omnium con­gregatio, pro aeter­na sibi in Domino stabilitate, colum­na, & firmamen­tum, dicitur verita­tis. August. Praef. Psal. 47. Ecclesiam Christi in sanctis, Ecclesiam Christi in hijs qui scripti sunt in caelo &c. ipsi digni sunt nomine firmamenti Eccle­sia Christi in hijs qui sunt firmi &c. eam firmamentum Apostolicis [...] appellatam audi & agnosce. 1. Timoth. 3.15., 1. Tim. 3. 15. by the Church, hee vnderstandeth the C House of the liuing God, as the precedent part of his speech sheweth, to wit, If I tarrie long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe in the House of God, &c. But they alone are verily and indeed the House of God, which beleeue and loue the Truth. S. August. Enchirid. c. 5.6. &c. Donatist. Lib. 7. cap. 50. Wicked people may be called Gods House, because of externall cal­ling, and visible profession, 2. Tim. 2. 20. Sed non sunt de compage domus, They are not of the frame of the House Gregor. Moral. Lib. 28. cap. 9. Intra has mensuras sunt omnes electi, extra has omnes Reprobi, etiamsi intra fidei limitem esse videantur., Heb. 3. 6. August. d. Bapt. Lib. 7. cap. 50. All they which couet earthly things, D preferring worldly felicitie before God; they which seeke their owne, and not those things which are Iesus Christs, ad vnam Ciuitatem illam pertinent, quae dicitur Babylonia mystice, & habet Regem Dia­bolum, belong onely to that Citie, which in a mysterie is called Baby­lon, and hath the Deuill the Head. Aug. sup. Psal. 61.

Wicked persons August. c. Don. Lib. 1. cap. 9 & 17. & Lib. 4. c. 4. &c. 7. E & Lib. 5. c. 16. & 19. & 24. & 26. & Lib. 6. c. 3. & 24. & Lib. 7. c. 50. Id. c. Petil. Lib. 2. c. 108. Id. Enchir. c. 56. Id. sup. Ioh. tr. 45. Id. sup. Psal. 47. & 106. Id d. vnit. Eccles. c. 19. Id. Ep. 51. Cyprian. Epist. 55. Orig. in Genes. Hom. 1. & [...] Ierem. Hom. 3. Basil. in Psal. 44. Chrysost. 2. Timoth. Hom. 5. Ambros. in Psal. 35. Hieron. in Iob. 26. & sup. Ephes. c. 5. Gregor. in Enang. Hom. 38. & Lib. 4. Moral. c. 9. &c. 15. & Lib. 20. c. 11. & Lib. 14. c. 19. & Lib. 16. c. 10. & sup. 5. Psal. Poenitent. Bernard. in Cantic. Serm. 68. (saith S. Augustine, Epist. 50.) figuram mem­bri tenent, retaine the figure or outward shape of a member, sed [Page 54] reuera corpus Domini non sunt, but they are not in truth the bo­die A of Christ ( August. d. Doct. Christ. Lib. 3. cap. 32.) In corpore Christi non sunt, quod est Ecclesia; They are not in the bodie of Christ, which is the Church. ( August. c. Crescon. Lib. 2. cap. 21.)

But they which are not of the Body of Christ, nor of the house of God, really, and in truth, doe not constantly preserue, or faithfully deliuer Apostolicall Traditions; neither are they one, or holy, nor yet such as the Spirit of God infallibly, and alwayes directeth in their publicke Doctrine.

OBSERVAT. V. B

The qualities of vnitie, holinesse, veritie, Apostolicall suc­cession, and other the like, are not alwayes found in the true Church equally, or in the same degree and measure of per­fection; but according to a latitude, and inequalitie of inten­sion and remission, and more or lesse: so that although the sounder part of the Church, hath alwayes the substance of truth, sanctitie, and vnitie; yet this veritie of Doctrine, vnitie of Charitie, sanctitie of Manners, is greater, larger, and more sincere and perfect in some persons and ages of the Church, C than in others. These qualities were in their greatest perfecti­on, when the Apostles themselues liued Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. 3. c. 26. Ad illa vsque tempora, &c. Ecclesia inte­gra & incorrupta permanserat caete­rum postquam sa­cer Apostolorum Chorus varium vitae exitum & diuersa mortis genera, pertulerat, praeterierat (que) illorum aetas, quibus à Christo donatum erat vt auribus diuinam ipsius sapientiam coram acciperent: tunc certe falsa & veteratoria impij erro­ris conspiratio exordium caepit, idque illorum fraude & astutia qui doctrinam à veritate penitus alienam disse­minare laborarent: quique cum nemini Apostolorum amplius vita suppeteret, de caetero jam nudo capite (vt aiunt) syn cero veritatis sermoni falsam & commentitiam doctrinam ex aduerso opponere pro viribus [...]. D, they were in great measure, in the ages immediately abutting vpon the Apostles: But the holy Fathers complaine of the decrease and decay of them in after times Cyprian. Ep. 8. & d. lapsis num. 4. Chrys. 1. Cor. Hom. 36. & Math. imperf. Hom. 49. Hieron. Esay. c. 24. & sup. Mych. c. 7. & sup. Soph. c. 2. Saluian. d. gubernat. Dei l. 3. Greg. Euang. Hom. 17. & sup. Reg. l. 4.: And Papists deplore the extreme dimi­nution of them in their dayes Gerson. d. Circumcis. Serm. 1. confid. 1. & d. potest. Eccles. lect. 10. & Epist. Brugis scripta. Aluar. Pelag. d. planct. Eccles. [...] Eccles. Concil. Basil. apud [...]. p. 139. & p. 266. p. 267. & 275. & p. 523..

OBSERVAT. VI.

It falleth out sometimes in the outward state of the visible Church, that wicked persons (which are not sound parts of Gods house, nor liuing members of Christs mysticall bodie, E being more in number Onus Eccles. cap. 43. §. 1. Nunc in Ecclesia copio­fior Proh pudor, est numerus malo­rum quam bonorum, & praeualet impius aduersus justum. and greater in power) doe possesse the chiefe places of publicke Iudicature, and Ecclesiasticall go­uernment: and being thus exalted, and withall abetted by [Page 55] worldly power, and swarmes of time-feruers Occham. dial. p. 3. tr. 1. l. 3. [...]. 13. Quando multitudo clericorum, per a­uaritiam ambitio­nem, symoniam & adias vias prauas, ad ordines dignitates & beneficia, Eccle­siastica peruenisset, &c. Propter quod procliuiores essent clerici, ad assenti­endum errori Papae & generalis Con­cilij, quia humani moris est illum ve­reri, cuius iudicio & voluntate, nunc erigitur nunc deprimitur. Onus Eccles. c. 42. Et habebant caudas scil. assentatores, vel sequa­ces similes scorpionum & aculei erant in caudis earum., whom they A aduance and honour, to accomplish their owne ends: it may heereby fall out, that the outward state of the visible Church, shall be ordered and swayed, according to the lust and will of wicked rulers Hildegard. part. 2. l. diu. oper. citatur. Onus Eccles. c. 4. §. 5.: And then good men may be disgraced, depres­sed, and persecuted: the simple, and they which are negligent, Auentin. annal. Bojor. l. 6. proem. p. 479. Math. Paris: Chron. p. 7. Clerici & ordinati adeo literatura ca­rebant, vt caeteris effet [...], qui Grammaticam didicisset. vnlearned, and secure, may be deluded, and errour and super­stition, craftily and couertly be brought in, and that is fulfilled which Gregory saith; Dum mali praepositi, suam contra veritatem honorem exigunt, ab omni rectitudine corda sequentium abducunt Aug. sup. Psalm. 8. Qui gloriam suam potius quam salutem hominum attenderunt, sine spiritu sancto locuti sunt.: When wicked rulers seeke their owne glory more than truth, they mis­leade B their followers from all course of righteousnesse.

This happened in the Iewish Church, when the Scribes and Pharises and other hypocrites and errants were, [...], ma­ster-builders, Math. 21.41. And the euill seruant beareth rule C in the houshold, and oppresseth his fellow-seruants, Matth. 24. 49. Diotrophes excommunicates and vsurpes according to his owne will Cassand. Consult. p. 929. Ecclesiae, gu. bernatoribus quos aliquando hostes Dei esse contingit, &c. Nam vt inquit August. sunt & intus hostes Dei quorum pectora obsedit, spiritus Antichristi & tamen gerunt spiritualia & diuina.: 3. Ep. Ioh. 9. 10. The Arrians in the dayes of Constantius and Valence did all the former, in the greater part of the Christian world Hieron. c. Lucif. & sup. Gal. c. 5. Ingenuit totus orbis & se Arianum esse miratus est. I­dem. sup. Psal. 133. Ante annos quindecem aut viginti, &c. Omnes Ecclesias has Haeretici possidebant. Idem. Chron. Anno 364. omnes pene toto orbe Ecclesiae, sub nomine pacis & Regis Arianorum consortio polluebantur. Basil. Epist. 17. Nobis jam dicere licet, quod in hoc tempore non sit, neque Princeps, neque Propheta, ne (que) praeses, ne (que) D oblatio, neque incensum, ne (que) locus in quo coram Domino possit offerri sacrificium, &c. Athanas. l. ad. solitar. vir. agent. Quae nunc Ecclesia libere Christum adorat? nam si alicubi sunt pij, & Christi studiosi (sunt autem plurimi illi itidem, vt magnus ille Propheta Elias absconduntur, & in speluncas & cauernas terrae sese abstrudunt, aut in­solitudine oberrantes, commorantur. [...]. Lir. c. Haer. c. 6. Arianorum venenum non jam portiunculam quan­dam sed pene totum orbem contaminauerat: adeo vt prope cunctis latini nominis Episcopis, partim vi partim fraude deceptis, caligo quaedam mentibus offunderetur..

The same happened in the Church of Rome, especially af­ter the thousand yeere, one man vsurped ouer the Christian world, making himselfe on earth, chiefe and sole commander ouer things diuine and humane Auentin. annal. Bojor lib. 5. pa. 447. Gregorius septimus E qui & Hildebrandus, &c. Primus contra morem majorum, contempta Imperatoris authoritate pontificatum maximum occupauit: [...] sibi [...] esse à Christo, se [...]; vt liberet ligare & soluere posse, &c. Ibid. [...] Imperium [...], quod successores per 450. continenter annos inuito mun­do, inuitis Imperatoribus adeo duxere, vt inferos superos, in seruiturem redegerint, [...]; sub jugum miserint, at (que) cuncta fulmine perterritent: Quo bruta, tellus & vaga [...]: Quo Stix & [...] horrida [...] sedes Ath­lanteusq, [...]; [...].: his power was so exorbitant [Page 56] and boundlesse, that he trode vpon the necke of kings Nancler. Gene­rat. 40. summus pentifex Imperato­ris collū pede [...], &c. Math. Paris. Chron. p. 223. Papa definiuit, vt rex Anglorum Io­hannes, à solio reg­ni deponeretur, & alius, Papa procu­rante succederes qui dignior haberetur. Ad hujus quoque sententiae executionem sctipsit Dominus Papa potentissimo Regi Fran­corum Phillipo, quatenus in remissionem omnium suorum peccatorum hunc laborem assumeret, &c. Papir. Masson. d. Episcop. vibis l. 5. in vit. Bonifacij 8. Sander. d. visib. Monarch. Tam sacerdotalis quam regia potestas communicata B est pastoribus Ecclesia., thro­ning A and dethroning, crowning and decrowning them, as him­selfe listed, his dominion was so absolute and vast, as that no man might reprooue or withstand him [...]. 40. c. 6. Si Papa, &c. Iacob. Graph. Decis. Aur. part. 1. l. 2. Omnia regit disponit & judicat, pro vt sibi placet, &c. Apud. eum est pro ratione voluntas, & quod ei placet legis habeat vigorem. [...]. Ancona. sum. d. Eccles. q. 63. ar. 1. Magis ligat praeceptum Papae quam ligamen legis naturae, &c. Baron. Anno 373. num. 21. vt plane apareat ex arbitrio dependisse Rom. Pontificis fidei decreta sancita, & sancita mutare.. All men were repu­ted heretickes or schismatickes, which would not say and sweare as he commanded Fazel. d. reb. [...]. l. 8. c. 2. Haereseos incusatur & damnatur Fredericus, quod inter alia Romanum pontificem, ipsum ana­thematis vinculo astringere non potuisse dixerit. Abbas. Vsperg. Anno 1012. p. 241.: in Synods and Councels, causes were transacted according to his will Bosius. d. sig. Eccles. l. 5. c. 9. Did. Nugnus. in 3. Thom. Addit. q. 20. ar. 3. Bellarm. d. Concil. l. 2. c. 11. Greg. Val. Tom. 3. d. 1. q. 1. p. 7. pa. 365. [...]. Bannes 22. q. 1. ar. 10. fo. 70.: and remission of sinnes, and right to life eternall, were intailed to his chaire Math. Paris. Chron. pa. 223. Quatenus in remissionem omnium suorum peccato­rum hunc laborem assumeret. Bell. d. Eccles. l. 3. c. 5..

IESVIT. C

This principle is consequent vpon the former: and out of it, sixe things may be clearely prooued. First, that there is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world: for if there be no meanes for men to know that Scriptures and other substantiall Articles came from Christ and his Apostles, and so consequently from God, but the Tradition of the Church; then there must needs be in all ages a Church, receiuing and deliuering these Traditions: else men in some ages since Christ D should haue beene destitute of the ordinarie meanes of sal­uation, because they had not meanes to know assuredly the substantiall Articles of Christianitie, without assured faith whereof no man is saued.

ANSVVER.

By true Church, we may vnderstand, either an vniuersall maltitude of Beleeuers, totally in respect of all persons, or di­stributiuely, E in regard of them which principally rule and com­mand, free from errour in publicke doctrine: Or else a choise and select number of Beleeuers, liuing either in the common fellowship of the generall visible Church, or vnited in parti­cular Congregations, by themselues, teaching and professing [Page 57] right Faith in all capitall points, and readie to imbrace all di­uine A Truth, when the same is manifested vnto them.

If the name of true Church be taken in the first sense, or for an Hierarchicall Church, wherein the principall commanders teach and maintaine truth intirely and sincerely, then the Pro­position, to wit, There is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world, is denied; for it is possible, that the greater Prelates, to wit, Popes, Cardinals, mitred Bishops, and Abbots (of which the Hierarchicall Church principally consisteth) shall bee repro­bates Aliaco. l. d. Re­form. Rom. Eccl. tit. d. ref. relig. Ad hunc statum venisse Ec­clesiam vt non sit digna regi nisi à re­probis., blinde guides Occham. Dial. p. 1. l. 2. c. 28. A tem­pore Innocent. ter­tij non fuerunt ali­qui pontifices in sa­crarum literarum peritia excellentes. Alphons. Castro. c. Haeres. l. 1. c. 4. Cum constet plures [...] adeo illitera­tos esse, vt Gram­maticā penitus ig­norent: Printed by Badius. Anno 1533., a generation of vipers, wolues in sheepes cloathing, and such as being armed with the title of the B Church, persecute the true Church Leo. Epist. 81. Ecclesiae nomine armamini & contra Ecclesiā dimicatis. Cyprianus. d. simpli­cit. Praelat. Diabo­lus excogitauit no­uam fraudem, vt sub ipso nominis Christiani titulo fallat incautos.. And that this is possible, it appeareth: First, by the example of the arch-rulers of the Iewish Church, which in some ages, corrupted true Religion, and persecuted the seruants of God, 2. Chron. 36. 14. More­ouer all the chiefe of the Priests, and the people, transgressed very much, after all the abominations of the heathen, and polluted the house of the Lord, &c. v. 16. They mocked the messengers of God, and do­spised his word, and misused his Prophets, &c. Reade 2. Kings. 16. 11, 16. Ierem. 2.8. Esay. 56.10. Malach. 2.8. Ierem. 20.1. & 23.1. 2. Machab. 4.10. Ezek. 34.4. Mark. 6.35. Math. 3.7. C Matth. 23. 13. Luk. 12. 1. Matth. 16. 12. Iohn. 10. 8. Ezek. 22. 26.

Secondly, the same apeareth to be true, both by the exam­ple of the greater Prelates of the Asian Churches, which cor­rupted true Doctrine and worship, and prouoked the Almightie so much, that he remooued their Candlesticke out of his place: and also by the example of the West Church it selfe, wherein Popes and greater Prelates, haue been illiterate, Monsters, Di­uels incarnate, Apostataes, men defiled with all wickednesse, and abominable sinnes (as Papists themselues report Genebrard. Chron. l. 4. anno 991. p. 553. per annos ferè 150. Pontifices circiter 50, &c. à vir­tute majorum prorsus defecerunt, [...] Iob. Sarisbur. Policrat. l. 6. c. 24. Rom. Ec­clesia quae mater [...] Ecclesiarum est, se non tam matrem [...] quam nouercam: sedent in ea Scribae & Pharisei, &c. [...]. in Benedicto 4. Hac monstra, haec portenta, à quibus ambitione, & largitione sanctis­sima Petri sedes occupata est. Concil. Const. sess. 11. ar. 5. Foex vitiorum, [...] incarnarus. Fascic. Temp. anno 1424. Iam con, cum sci, de conscientia abrasis, solum entia sponsam Christi gubernare videmus: personas vide­licet, conscientia scientiaque carentes, & velut entia insensibilia. [...]. d. Casal. cited by Onus Eccles. c. 43. n. 9. Carnalis jam Ecclesia dicitur noua Babilon & meretrix magna, quia in ea, vtpote in pluribus & potioribus membris, ordo virtutum per deordinationem vitiorum [...] est confusus, nec non sui sponsi Iesu amor tur­piter adulteratus & eius cultus nequiter neglectus, modica quidem grana tritici, sunt in immenso palearum cumulo, quoniam instorum Spiritus hoc tempore à malis [...] vsque adeò, vt prae multitudine peruer­sorum E justus cogarur seruire Babiloni in plerisque [...] actibus, Ecclesia [...] quasi ancilla facta est, [...] quondam silij Israel propter peccata multorum, capiti in Babilone seruire compulsi sunt. [...]. d. planct. Eccles. lib. 2. ar. 5. Nunc autem ex quo in Ecclesijs sicut in Romano Imperio creuit [...]: perijt lex de Sacerdotibus & visio de Propheta: & ad literam hodie in Ecclesia deficit Spiritus Prophe­tiae: &c adimpletur quod scribitur, 3. Reg. 22. Egrediar & cro spiritus mendea in [...] omnium Prophe­carum..) And con­cerning D [Page 58] Doctrine, it is euident, by comparing their decrees A with the Scriptures, and the ancient Fathers and Councels, that they are in many things departed from the truth. And Occham Occham. dial. part. 1. [...]. c. 26. [...]. Disp. cum [...]. Si coire ne­queant partes erro­ris cum virtute, multo minus con­uenerint veritas & vicium. Origen. in Math. [...]. Haec alterutrum se sequuntur & non seperantur ab in vicem, sermo mundus in anima, & vita irreprehensibilis. saith: Omnis congregatio quae potest errare contra bonos mores, potest errare contra fidem: quia mali mores excacant intellectum: Because euill manners blinde the iudgement, therefore euery assembly which may erre notoriously in manners, may erre against the Faith.

But if, by true Church, we vnderstand a number of Belee­uers, B smaller or greater, teaching and professing right Faith, in all substantiall and capitall points, and willing to imbrace and teach all other diuine veritie, when the same is made knowne vnto them: then it is granted, that there is a true Church of Christ alwayes in the world. And this kind of Beleeuers, doe either teach and professe their Faith and Religion in congrega­tions apart, or in the externall fellowship and common societie of corrupt Beleeuers: as appeareth by the example of the Iewes, in the dayes of their wicked Kings and Priests: and in C the time of the Pharisees. The open and publicke ministerie of Priests was corrupt in those dayes, yet God had a remnant of people, and small Church, in the middest of this blindnesse, Esay 1.9.

In the other part of this Section, the Iesuite produceth an Argument to prooue, That there is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world. The summe of his Argument is:

Christ neuer leaueth the world destitute of the ordinarie meanes of saluation: and people D cannot haue the meanes of saluation, but from the true Church; and by the Tradition there­of, by which they receiue the Scriptures, and the rule of Faith, to guide them in the exposition of the Scriptures.

ANSVVER.

It is lost labour to spend time in proouing against vs, that E there is alwayes in the world a true Church [...]. d. Ec­cles. l. 3. c. 13. Notan­dum est multos ex nostris, tempus terrere dum probant absolutè Ecclesiam non posse deficere, nam Caluinus & caeteri Haeretici id concedunt. Gerbard. loc. com. [...]. 5. d. Eccles. num. 107. Ecclesiam perpetuo durasse & perpetuo duraturum esse extra controuersiam ponimus.: for wee haue [Page 59] euer acknowledged this. The thing that we denie, is, that al­though A there bee alwaies in the world a Church, the [...] members whereof are free from damnable and [...] errour; yet there is not alwaies a true Church in the world whose commanding Prelates are free from all error, or [...] part of it from malicious error.

Secondly, It is granted that Christ doth not according to his antecedent will, leaue the world destitute of the meanes of Saluation, Math. 23.37. 1. Timoth. 2.4. 2. Pet. 3.9. But notwith­standing this will of Christ [...]. Orth. fid. lib. 2. ca. 29. &c. Manich. Aquinas p. 1. q. 19. ar. 6. Bonauent. 1. q. 47. art. Vnic. Scot. 1. d. 46. q. Vnic. Occham Ri­chardus. Greg. [...]. Durand. Gabrul. [...], [...]. d. Auxil. dips. 34. [...]. in 1. p. [...]. q. 19 [...]. 56. num. 17.18., many people may be actually destitute of the meanes of Saluation, by the negligence of B Preachers Gre. li. 5. Epist. 59. Anglorum gentem, Deo annuente velle fieri Christianam, sed Sacerdotes qui in vicino sunt, pa­storalem ergà [...] sollicitudinem non habete., and through their owne negligence or malice, contemning or repelling the said meanes, when they are offe­red vnto them, Acts 13.46.

Thirdly, A corrupt visible Church may truely deliuer some parts of sacred Truth, and among other verities, it may deliuer the Apostles Tradition touching the Canon of the Scripture, C and also the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed. This appeareth by the Churches of the Nestorians at this day, and also of old by the Iewish Church, which at such times as it was Idolatrous and vnsound, preserued the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and by transcribing and rea­ding, deliuered the whole Text thereof truely, Rom. 3.2. and Acts 15.21.

Fourthly, If we should grant (which is false, as appeareth by the Greeke Church) that there was in some ages past, no other Church but the Roman, and the adheres thereof, and af­firme D withall that the chiefe Prelats thereof, and their faction, maintained sundrie erronious and superstitious doctrines; yet because all Doctors and people (liuing within the externall communion of that Church) were not equally poysoned and surprised with error Occham. Dial. p. 1. li. 5. c. 28. Quod si consilium in Haeresin labererur, [...] Catholici, qui occultè vel publicè [...] expediret, auderent fidem defendere orthodoxam. Ille autèm qui reprobatis filijs earnalibus Abrahae potest de lapidibus suscitare fi­lios Abrahae spirituales, potensest & omnibus in generade [...] conuenientibus in [...] lapsis, imò [...] mundi, & potentibus secularibus [...] damnatis, de lapidibus, id est, [...] rudibus & abiectis panperibus & despectis Catholicis, Dei filios suscitare. Frans. Picus. Mirand. Theorem. 23. Hoc autèm verbo pernitiosè vsi in [...] sumus, ob id quod [...] quempiam errare Deus (occulto suo [...]) E [...] id [...], adest [...] voluntatis viris diui­na protectio, quae noxium peccati virus [...] à conscientia, immunes & illaesas sanctorum virorum animas cu­stodit & seruat. Multi enim erroribus & de mille annis & de iteratione Baptismi maculati, beatitudine tamen do­nati sunt, & ab Ecclefia celebrati [...], Papias Episoopus, [...] Pictauiensis, Irinaeus Lugdunensis; & alij., but many among them firmely belee­uing [Page 60] all fundamentall [...], were [...] by adeu out and [...] A [...] in some other points. It followeth not that the world should be destitutes of all meanes of saluation: for these founder members, lining in the visible Roman Church, might deliuer the maine and capitall Articles of Christiani­tie, and their ignorance and error in other matters, was in those daies pardonable, because they offended in simplicitie, and were [...] unawares.

IESVIT. B

Secondly, this Church must be alwaies visible and conspicious, for the Traditions of the Church must euer bee famous, glorious, and notoriously knowne in the world, that a Christian may say with S. Augustine, I beleeue no­thing but the consent of Nations and Countries, and most celebrious fame. Now if the Church were hidden in se­cret, invisible in any age, then her Traditions could not bee Doctrines, euer illustriously known, but rather obscure, hid­den, C Apochriphall, Ergo the Church the mistris pillar and foundation of Truth must bee alwaies visible and conspi­cuous, which if need bee, may be further prooued most euidently.

ANSVVER.

The Church according to the Popish Tenet, is said to be Vi­sible, because it alwaies hath such an outward forme and ap­pearance in the eyes of the world, as that people are able by D sence or common reason to know the same materially, and to distinguish it from other societies of infidels and Hereticks Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. fid. pa. 1. du. 1. c. 2. Si igitùr nequè ad sensum Ecclesia potest latere, consequens est, vt in omnium occulos incurrat, Et proinde quod veritas illius, non solum percipiatur mente sed etiam sensu..

And by the Church in this question, they vnderstand, a com­panie of beleeuers, professing Christian Faith without error, submitting themselues to the Bishop of Rome, as to their vni­uersall Visible head Azer. Moral. [...]. part. 2. li. 5. c. [...]. Ecclesia dicitur visibilis, quia in v­nius, & ciusdem fidei professione consistit, sub vno capite visibili, videlicet, summo Christi Vicario Rom. pontifice, &c.. And they affirme concerning the said Church, that it may at all times be sensibly knowne and discer­ned E Stapl. Rel. c. 1. q. 3. ar. 1. pa. 33. Aspectabilis & sensibus [...]. Brellar. d. Eccles. li. 3. ca. 15. Greg. Val. [...]. 3. pa. 88. Ecclesiam omni tempore visibilem, id est, cognitu [...]. Jb. pa. 185. Euidentèr potest [...] seculo conspici & [...] & quasi digito demonstrari., and that the place of aboad, and the principall members [Page 61] thereof are openly knowne, and the externall actions of the A same, to wit, Preaching, Praying, administration of [...] may bee alwaies heard and seene, and that the same is perpetually sensible and [...], like vnto earthly kingdomes and common weales [...].

Some few of them acknowledge, that it is possible for the same, for some short season, to loose part of the externall am­plitude and glorie, and to be ouershadowed with clouds and B stormes of Heresies, Scismes, and Persecutions [...]. [...]. [...]. 3. pa. 187. [...]. Re­lect. p. 30.: but yet they all [...] that euen in those tempestuous seasons, it is con­spicuous to the world, in regard of the principall members [...] & turgidis granis est perpetuò [...] & [...]., and that the common and ordinarie condition of the true Church is to be amply, famously, and in a glorious manner visible [...]. [...]. pa. 111. [...]. [...] [...]. fid. vol. 1. dub. 1. c. 1. [...] illustrior..

But our Tenet is, First, That the true Church abideth often­times C in persecution, either of [...] and externall enemies, or of domesticall foes [...] Ecclesiae [...] fuit &c. Altera per­secutio fraudulen­ta &c. [...] super­est per [...] D ventura, qua [...] est perniciosius quoniàm & [...] & fraudulenta erit. Bernard Serm. d. [...]. S. Pauli. Videbatur [...] cessasse [...], &c. sed [...] quod [...] est, ipsi. [...], qui ab [...] Christiani [...]. Amici [...] Deus & proximi [...] te [...], &c. Jd. in Psal. Qui hab­serm. 6. & sup. Cantic. serm. 33.. And in time of persecution, by ei­ther of [...] enemies, it may be reputed a false Church, or im­pious Sect by the multitude [...]. in [...] c. 16. [...] Christiani genus [...] nouae & [...]. [...]. [...]. annal. li. 15., and consequently be vnknown to, the wicked world, vnder the Notion of holy and true: and in such persecutions the loue of many may waxe cold, Math. 24.12. and iniquitie and infidelitie so abound, Luc. 17.26. & cap. 18.8. that the number of right beleeuers shall be few, and the same may bee compelled to exercise their religion in [...] [...]. in Luc. li. 10. c. 21. [...]. [...] & Lacus, & Carceres & [...], in illis [...]. Symbol. ar. 2. pa. 378. [...] Cryptis, &c. [...] 18. c. 7. numb. 64. Cultus diuinus & iuge sacrificium, [...] temporis, cessent in [...] & patentibus [...] non [...] in abditis & [...]..

Secondly, We deny that a naturall man is able infallibly to iudge and discerne by sence and common reason, or human prudence only, which is the true Church of Christ [...] sup. 3. c. [...]., where­unto E euery one that wil be saued must vnite and ioine himselfe, 1. Cor. 2.11.14.

Now the reasons for which we reiect or limit the Popish Doctrine, concerning the Churches visibilitie, are these.

[Page 62] [...] A [...] [...] [...], [...]. 1.8.1. Thess. [...]. [...]. Lib. 3. [...] princi­palitatem, necesse est [...] om­nem Ecclesiā, hoe est cos qui sunt vn­di (que) fideles, in qua semper ab eis qui [...] ab [...] est [...]. and not what the same must be perpetually. Some teach what the same is by outward calling, and consequently what in right, by precept and dutie, it ought to be. Some Matth. 5. 18. [...]. Lirin. c. [...]. c. Sedula & canta apud se dogmatum custos, &c. Texts of holy Scripture de­scribe the inward and spirituall beautie of the sounder part of the Church, by Allegories and similitudes, taken from externall and worldly pompe and glorie: Psalm. 45. 9. Esay 35.2. & Esay [...] Some places shew what [...] ought to performe, when the publike and common Mi­nisterie B of the Church is incorrupt, and ordinarie Pastors in Doctrine and Discipline proceed according to the Ordinance of Christ. [...] Lastly, some of the Fathers liuing in Ages wherein the outward face of the Church was externally glorious, & not foreseeing what was imminent and future, might probably sup­pose, that the same should alwayes retaine the like beautie. And yet S. Augustine, who because of the Donatists, speaketh most largely in this kind, August. c. Crescon. lib. 2. c. 36. &c. Petil. lib. a. c. 104. & contra Faust. lib. 13. c 13. & [...] vnit. [...]. cap. 25. vseth words of limitation and ex­ception, and affirmeth, that the splendor of the Church in time of Persecution may be eclipsed, and the glorie thereof ouer­shadowed. C [...]

Secondly, The Arguments against the glorious and perpetu­all Visibilitie of the true Church (according to our aduersaries D Tenet) are weightie. First, The best and worthiest members of the said Church may be persecuted, disgraced, and condem­ned as Heretikes, and impious persons: as appeareth by the ex­ample of [...] Athanasius, Hilarius, Ambrosius, &c. And this may be done by great multitudes, and by learned persons, and by such as are potent in worldly and Ecclesiasticall power: and in such times the true Church, vnder the notion of a true Church, cannot be generally and gloriously visible. Secondly, The prime Rulers and Commanders in the visible Church doe at some times by Ambition, and other enormious Vices, become E enemies vnto Truth, [...]. [...]. d. Planct. Eccles. lib. 1. ar. 5. Principes Ecclesiae sunt exercitus daemonum, cum deberent esse [...]. Lira, [...]. 16. Multi principes & [...], & alij [...] a side, &c. [...]. as our aduersaries themselues acknow­ledge, [Page 63] concerning all other Bishops, but onely the Roman and A his adheres; and that the Roman Popes and Prelates haue de­parted from right Faith, and exceeded others in monstrous ambition, and wickednesse, is reported by many amongst them­selues. Now when these Master-builders fall, innumerable multitudes of inferiour ranke, for hope, fauour, feare, and other humane and carnall respects, concurre with them; Occham, Dial. p. 1. Lib. 7. cap. 48. Fabulas & errores Papae Haeretici, multitudo praeci­pue magistrorum ambitiosorum, & [...] sequi­tur. and then the number of Infidels, which remaine without the Church, being added to the Church malignant; the totall summe of both amounteth to a great number, and in comparison of them, right beleeuers may be few, Onus Ecclesiae, c. 43. §. 1. Nunc in Ecclesia copio­sior (proh dolor) est numerus [...] quam bonorū, & praeualet impius aduersus bonum. Aluar. Petag. d. Planct. Eccles. li. 2. art. 5. Mistica Sy­on Ecclesia cali­gine peccati & er­toris & ignorantiae [...], quae tantis muneribus in Ec­clesia primitiua, [...] suo sponso ditabatur, &c. Ad terram de coelo proiectam conspicimus quia quasi inhabitata & deserta est: Et fi qui supersunt cultores, quasi Arabes & Saraceni sunt. and their reputation in the world so B meane, as that they shall not be generally knowne the true Church. And if they be not knowne, and esteemed a true Church by the greatest part of the world, then they are not famously visible at all times, as our aduersarie maintaines. Thirdly, The Scriptures foretell a comming and reigne of An­tichrist, a large Apostasie and reuolt from the right Faith, a ra­ritie of true beleeuers, and decay of Charitie, a flying of the true Church into the Wildernesse, and grieuous persecutions of Gods Elect, before the finall consummation of the World. 2. Thess. 2.3. &c. 1. Tim. 4.1. 2. Tim. 3.1. &c. Luc. 18.8. Matth. C 24. 12, 24. Reuel. 12.6. Aluar. Pelag. d. [...]. Eccles. Lib. 2. art. 5. Nunc autem ex quo in Ecclesia sicut in Rom, Imperio creuit auaritia, perijt Lex de Sacerdotibus, & visie de Prophetis, & ad terram defecit hodie in Ecclesia spiritus Prophetiae, & [...] quod scribitur. 3. Reg. 22. Egrediar & [...] spiritus mendax in ore omnium Prophetarum. But such a perpetuall visibilitie of the Church as Romists imagine, is not compatible with the precedent Predictions. But the Iesuit saith,

IESVIT. D

Because the Tradition of the Church must be at all times famous, glorious, and notoriously knowne in the World: therefore the true Church, which is the Teacher, Pillar, and Foundation of Tradition, must be at all times famously visible to the eye of the World.

ANSWER. E

Neither the Antecedent nor Consequent of this Argument are firme. It is not alwayes true, that those things are visible, which make other things famous, glorious, and notoriously knowne; for that which is innisible to the eye of the World, [Page 64] may cause other things to be famous: as wee see in God him­selfe, A in Christ, in the holy Apostles, &c. Also persons liuing in disgrace, and persecution, may by writing from Exile, Prison, or vnknowne Habitations, make Diuine Truth notoriously knowne, to the making of the enemies thereof inexcusable, and the conuersion of others, as appeareth in Athanasius.

Secondly, The Antecedent is false: If the Iesuit, by the word (Must) vnderstand that, which by an immutable proui­dence of the Almightie shall infallibly in all ages be fulfilled; it is not decreed by the Almightie, that the Doctrine and Tra­dition of Diuine Veritie shall in all Ages be generally famous, B and notoriously knowne to the World; the same must alwayes (in matters substantiall and necessarie) be sufficiently knowne to some part of the World.

But many people, for sundrie Ages, haue beene ignorant of Christ Prosp. d. voc. Gent. Lib. 2. cap. 6. Acosta, d. Proc. In­dor. Salur. Li. 1. c. 5. pa. 133. August. d. confens. Euang. li. 1. cap. 31. Per multos annos Ecclesia, quae C futura erat in omnibus gentibus in [...] suis, hoc est in sanctis suis, non [...], &c. Et d. vnit. Eccles. cap. 14. [...]. d. Pontif. Rom. l. 3. ca. 4. Antechristus nondum venit, quia Euangelium nondum suit [...] in [...] mundo., and of the whole Tradition and Doctrine of the A­postles, and a large tract of the World remaineth at this present day in Heathenish and damnable ignorance Concil. Lateran. sub. Leo. 10. Sess. 8. Iacet desolata Afia, iacet Africa, iacet AEgyptus, ac bona Eu­ropae [...] deserta, abiecta fine lege, sine moribus, sine [...] Christianae legis consortio, p. 599. [...], to. 4.; and consequent­ly, to a large part of the World, Tradition is not in a famous and glorious manner notoriously knowne.

IESVIT.

Thirdly, The Church is Apostolicall, and that apparantly descending from the Apostolicall Sea, by succession of Bi­shops, Aug. li. d. vtil. Cred. c. 17. vsque ad confessionem generis humani, euen D to the acknowledgement of humane kind, as S. Augustine speaketh.

ANSWER.

The true visible Church is named Apostolicall, not because of locall and personall succession of Bishops (onely or princi­pally) but because it retaineth the Faith and Doctrine of the holy Apostles, Eph. 2. 20. Ambros. Hugo Lira, in Comment. sup. Fundamentum Apostol. 1. c. sup. Doctrinam. Reuel. 21.14. Albert. Com. Apocal. cap. 21. Fundamenta, &c. [...] sunt super quo­rum fidem, & doctrinam [...] Ecclesia fundata est. Tertullian. d. Pra­script. cap. 32. affirmeth Ad [...] [...] prouocabunur ab alijs [...] quae licet nullum ex Apostolis aut Apostolicis, Authorem suum proserant, vt [...], quae denique quo­tidie instituuntur tamen in cadem side conspirantes, non minus Apostolicae [...] pro [...] Doctrinae., That Churches which are able to produce E [Page 65] none of the Apostles, or other Apostolicall men for their first planters, A are notwithstanding Apostolicall, for consent of Faith, and consan­guinitie of Doctrine. And many learned Papists, antient and moderne, say Cordub. Arma. fid. q. 1. prop. 2. Di­citur Apostolica, quia fundata est in doctrina Aposto­sorum, quo ad fidem legem & Sacramenta, neque aliam contrariam doctrinam habet, Eph. 2. 20. Occham. Dial. pa. 1. li. 5. c. 24. [...]. to. 1. serm, in Concil. Generali. p. 369. [...]. summa. d. Ecclesia l. 1. c. 18. [...]. mo­ral. Institut. p. 2. l. 5. c. 21. The Church is called Apostolicall, because it is grounded vpon the Doctrine of the Apostles, in respect of Faith, Lawes, and Sacraments.

But personall or locall succession onely, and in it selfe, ma­keth B not the Church Apostolicall, because hirelings and wolues may lineally succeed lawfull and orthodoxe Pastours, Act. 20.29, 30. Euen as sicknesse succeedeth health, and darkenesse light, and a tempest faire weather, as Gregorie Nazianzen affirmeth. Orat. d. laud. Athanasij Nazian. Orat. 21. [...]. pa. 377..

That which is common and separable, cannot of it selfe de­monstrate the true Church. And the notes of the Church C must be proper and inseparable, agreeing to all times, to euery true Church (as Bellarmine Bel. d. Eccles. l. 4. c. 2. Notae debent esse propriae non communes. 2. no­tiores ca re cujus sunt notae. 3. inse­parabiles à vera Ecclesia. affirmeth.) Also, the same must be so conspicuous, as that they cannot easily bee pretended by Aduersaries Stapl. Rel. c. 1. q. 4. ar. 5. p. 114. No­tae debent esse ita perspicuae vt nec ab Aduersarijs fa­cile D praetexi queant, nec vllo modo dubiae, aut controuersae sunt. [...] confess. c. 20. Notae quibus omnis de Ec­clesia penes quos ea sit dubitatio tolli possit, ita Ecclesiae propriae vt eas sibi nequaquam vsurpare possint [...]., or be at all controuerted or doubtfull. But per­sonall succession may bee found in a false Church, as appeareth by the Iewish Church, in the time of the Pharisees, and by the Churches of the East in the dayes of the Arrians: and our Aduersaries affirme the Greeke Church to be vnsound, not­withstanding it is apparently descended from the Apostles Niceph. Chron. l. 8. c. 6. Stapl. princip. Doctr. l. 13. c. 16. Graecae Ecclesiae ab ipsis Apostolorum fundamentis perso­nalem successionem demonstrare possunt. Anton. Perez. vol. 1. Du. 24. c. 14. p. 70. Baron. An. 44. nu. 12. ex ep. Agapeti. Horant. loc. l. 6. c. 7. Turrian. Resp. ad Sadael p. 124., by a lineall succession of Bishops.

Cardinall Bellarmine Bellarm. d. Ec­cles. lib. 4. c. 6. Ar­gumentum à suc­cessione legitima adfertur à nobis precipue ad pro­bandam non esse Ecclesiam, vbi non est haec successio, quod quidem euidens est: ex quo tamen non colligitur necessariò ibi esse Ecclesiam vbi est successio. perceiuing the weight of the former Argument, departeth from the common opinion of other Pa­pists, saying: That although personall succession alone, or by it selfe, is not a proper note of a true Church, yet the ab­sence thereof, prooueth a nullitie of the Church in them which E want it.

[Page 66] But if this be so, then personall and locall succession must A bee expuged out of the Calendar of Churches notes: for all proper notes argue and demonstrate their subiect, both [...] and negatiuely: also, they demonstrate the same of themselues, without the assistance of other things. If there­fore externall succession prooueth not a true Church, except right Faith bee concurring; and if (as Bellarmine teacheth) it rather serueth to prooue there is not the true Church where it wanteth, than to argue a true Church where it is: then the same is not proper and conuertible, and consequently it is no essentiall marke, because to bee proper and conuertible, B are of the being of notes, according to the Cardinals Supra. Bellarm. Stapl. [...] lit. a. owne description.

It is likewise remarkeable, that the ancient Fathers Iren. l. 4. c. 43. lis qui in Ecclesijs sunt Presbyteris [...], qui successione ha­bent [...] Apostolis quicunque cum E­piscopatus succes­sione charisma ve­ritatis certum se­cundum placitum patris acceperunt. Id. cap. 44. Ad hae­rere his qui & Apo­stolorum Doctrinā custodiunt, & cum Praesbyterij ordine sermonem sanum & conuersationem sine offensa praestant. Tertul. c. Haeres. c. 32. Ipsa doctrina eorum cum Apostolica comparata ex diuersitate & [...], neque Apostolici alicuius Authoris effe, ne (que) Apostoli. doe not onely or principally vnderstand personall succession, when they mention succession in their writings: because they argue affir­matiuely from succession, and not negatiuely onely. Therefore Romists in this disputation, shall doe well to begin with the questions which concerne Doctrine, and prooue that they haue succession of Doctrine, in all those Articles wherein they op­pose C other Churches, before they mention locall and perso­nall succession: but the manner of these men is to obserue a contrarie proceeding, and from the latter to conclude the for­mer, Baron. Anno 31. [...]. 52. (Ait) magnam esse successionis vim cum ex cujusuis hominis qui compos sit rationis sententia certum exploratumque habeatur illic esse legitimum [...], ipsum inquam Catholicam Ecclesiam apud quam [...] exordio est legitimè conseruata. Hosius confess. c. 28. Didicimus jam ibi esse Aposto­licā Ecclesiā vbi est Doctrina Apostolorū, porro Doctrina Apostolorū ibi est, vbi est legitima Episcoporú successio, D &c. Idem. c. Brent. l. 2. p. 76. Ibi est Ecclesia vbi est legitima Sacerdotum & Episcoporum successio & ab hac suc­cessione semper veritas est petita. [...] Defens. Cath. p. 991. which is against good reason, and against the Custome and manner of the ancient Fathers Aug. d. vnit. Eccles. c. 16. Sed vtrùm ipsi Ecclesiā teneant, non nisi diuinarum Canonicis libris ostendant, quia nec nos proptereà dicimus nobis credere oportere, quòd in Ecclesia Christi sumus quiaipsam quam tenemus commendauit Mileuitanus optatus, vel Mediolanensis Ambrosius, vel alij inumerabiles nostrae communionis Episcopi, aut quià nostrorum Collegarum Cóncilijs ipsa predicata est..

IESVIT.

For how can the Tradition of Christian doctrine be emi­nently and notoriously Apostolicall, if the Church deliuering E the same, hath not a manifest and conspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles, which is a conuincing argu­ment vsed by Saint Augustine; how can we thinke that we [Page 67] [...] receiued manifestly Christ, if wee [...] not also [...] A manifestly his Church? It is a Principle of Phylosophie, Propter quod vnumquodque tale & illud magis. But the name of Christ his glory, his vertue and miracles, are to the world famously knowne from age to age, by rea­son of the Church, and her preaching, that in her first Pa­stours saw them with their eyes. Ergo, This Church must needes be more famous, more illustrious, as able to giue fame vnto the being, and Doctrine, and actions of B Christ.

ANSVVER.

I haue shewed in the former Section, that the visible Church is principally called Apostolicall, because it imbraceth the do­ctrine of the holy Apostles. And euerie Church is Aposto­licall, so farre foorth onely, as it consenteth with the Apostles in Doctrine, Sacraments, Inuocation, and in that which is sub­stantiall in Ecclesiasticall policie. And in a precedent Section C I haue declared, That the visible Church may at some times bee more or lesse Apostolicall, holy, &c. But it is not at any time simply or principally Apostolicall, because it hath exter­nall personall succession. Occham, a famous Schooleman, and some others with him affirme, That a true and Apostolicall Church may consist of a few lay people, Occham. Dial. p. 1. l. 4. c. 9. & l. 5. c. 3. &c. 8. &c. 23. and if all the Prelates and Clerkes throughout the world should become hereticall, God may raise vp Pa­stours, either extraordinarily, Ibid. c. 28. Ille qui reprobatis filijs carnalibus Abrahae D potest de lapidibus suscitare Filios Abrahae spirituales, potens est & omnibus ad generale Conciliū conuenientibus in [...] lapsis, imo omnibus Clericis mundi falsitate Haeretica [...], de [...] id est Laicis rudibus & abjectis pauperibus, & despectis Catholicis Dei filios suscitare. [...] enim in [...] ( [...] & religiosis ac magistratibus repudiatis) fidem primitus fundauit Catholicam, ita & omnibus [...] & potentibus datis in re­probum sensum, potest dare pauperes simplices illiteratos & rusticos, in [...] Ecclesiae Orthodoxae. or else hereticall Bishops [...] Pastours, the Church may be reformed by them.

But to the Argument I answere as followeth Ib. c. 30. Si tota multitudo Clerico­rum haereticaretur, vel Ecclesia careat praedictis, de facto tamen si remanse­rint alij Clerici hae­retici, possunt aliqui Catholici ordinari, ab eis, &c quibus ordinatis possunt omnia predicta re­parari..

First, if the same were wholly granted, nothing could bee concluded against the Church of England from it, because the Bishops and Pastours of this Church, are able to exhibite a Pedigree or deriuation, both of their Ministerie and Doctrine E from the Apostles.

1. Of Ministerie, in that they haue for substance, the same descent of externall Ordination which the Romane Church hath.

[Page 68] 2. Of Doctrine, because they maintaine the Primitiue Faith, A and accord in the same with the soundest part of the Catho­licke Church in all ages. And where we may seeme to discent from the Antient, the same is either in things humane and adia­phorous [...] Dial. p. 1. li. 2. ca. 4. Sancti aliqua tanquā Ca­tholica quaedā tan­quam ad fidem ne­cessariò spectantia, nonnulla verò tan­quam probata tra­diderunt., or in matters which were not fully discussed, or in points which were not deliuered by an vnanimous consent, or in things which are reprooued by plaine demonstration of ho­ly Scripture [...]. Carmeld. [...]. ca. 7. Quamuis sanctorum Doctorum scripta, extrà Canonem Biblie sunt legenda, &c. Cum debita [...]; non tamen sunt [...] firmae authoritatis & immobilitatis, quin liceat B [...] contradicere, & circà ea dubitare vbi per Scripturam sanctam euidentèr & expressè non probatur, &c., and wherein the Fathers permit libertie of dis­senting, and the Papists themselues take the like libertie Aug. d. pers. Sanctorum ca. 21. Neminem velim sic amplecti mea omnia, vt me sequatur, nisi in eis qui­bus me non errare perspexerit, epist. 48. Hoc genus literarum ab authoritate Canonis distinguen dum est, & epist. 111. & epist. 112. Nolo authoritatem [...] sequaris, &c. & proem. li. 3. d. Trinit. Iob. Driedo. d. Dogm. Eccles. lib. 4. part. 5. c. 6. Nequè ipsi omnes suas sententias suis libris dictas tradiderunt nobis, tanquā fidei sententias dicentes quidem vel per [...], vel per opinionem, vel per rationem, solum ipsis probabilem, ac verisimilem super rebus gestis innixi interdùm solis hominum quorundam testimonijs quos crediderunt veraces, & tamèn potuisse falli & fallere..

Secondly, the Iesuits Interrogation (How can the Tradition of Christian Doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall, if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and perspicuous pedi­gree or deriuation from the Apostles?) is answered: this may be C performed two waies. 1. By the historie and monuments of the Primatiue Church, whose descent and pedigree from the Apostles was perspicuous. 2. The same may be made mani­fest by the Scriptures of the Apostles, which are diuine and authenticall Records of all Apostolicall Doctrine, and contain in themselues many liuely and effectuall Arguments, proouing to such as read and examine them with diligence and vnder­standing, that they are the Doctrine of the holy Ghost, and consequently the worke of the Apostles. And the maiestie and lustre of heauenly Doctrine is such, that if it be propounded D by meane and obscure persons, it will appeare illustrious, euen as a rich Iewell, if the same be deliuered by a poore Artificer, doth manifest his owne worth: and therefore the sequell of the Iesuits Argument is denied; for it followeth not because the Doctrine of Christ must be illustrious, that the Church which deliuereth the same, must be alwaies so.

Thirdly, S. Augustine in the place obiected, Epist. 48. confu­teth the Donatists, which confined the Church vniuersall to one countrie only, excluding the rest of the world from the communion thereof: against this error he saith, How can wee E thinke that we haue receiued Christ made manifest, if we haue not also receiued his Church made manifest? From hence nothing can be inferred, but that we receiue the true Church, not only at one time, or in one place, but at all times, and in all places where it [Page 69] is manifest, and that Christ is reuealed and made manifest by A the Doctrine of the Apostles, and that this Doctrine must be preached (although not at one time, yet successiuely) through­out the whole world. But all this which S. Augustine spea­keth being granted, prooueth not that the true Church shall be notoriously eminent and visible at all times: neither doth this Father say, that Christ cannot bee manifest but by such a Church only, as can lineally deriue her pedigree by Records and Tables from the Apostles. And howsoeuer Papists boast of their owne pedigree, yet when their Catalogue of descent is duely examined, all the passages are not so currant in it as B they pretend.

Fourthly, the principle of Aristotle Aristot. Anal. Poster. li. 1. ca. [...] [...]. vpon which the last Argument is grounded, admitteth many exceptions, Zabarel. com. ib. Text. 15. & 16. Multas videtur pa­ti difficultates, &c. Aquin. [...] Quest. 87. ar. 2. ad. 3. [...] habet si intel­ligatur in his quae sunt vnius ordinis, &c. Idem. [...]. Sent. d. 12. ar. 2. ad. 2. Quan­dò [...] est causa alterius essentiali ordine. That, be­cause of which another thing is such, is it selfe much more such, when both things are of the same order, and pertake the same affecti­on, as Christ which sanctifieth is more holy than they which are sanctified. Fire is hotter than water, and other things war­med by it, &c. But it holdeth not in causes equiuocall or par­tiall, or in causes by accident, or of diuers order. The Sunne causeth life in plants, and yet the Sunne is without life. A whet­stone C sharpeneth tooles, and yet is dull it selfe. Euill manners cause good lawes, and yet euill manners are not good. Daniels wisdome is reuealed to Baltasar by the queene, Dan. 5. 10, 11. yet Daniell is not made a [...] man, nor onely knowne to be such, by that report: so likewise the name of Christ, his glo­rie, his vertue, and miracles are famously knowne of belecuers from age to age, by reason of the Church and her preaching, &c. But all this concerning Christ is neither principally nor only made knowne to the world by the present Church, nor by D the Roman Church, more effectually than by other Churches, and the Church is a caufe of one kind and order, and the Scrip­ture of another. The Church is veluti Preco & Nuntius, like a Cryer and Messenger, but the holy Scripture is the Word, Handwriting, [...] tom. 5. Hom. d. sui Expuls. [...] manum eius ipsa, mihi murus inexpugnabilis. and Epistle of Christ, Jdem 2. Thess. Hom. 3. Epistolae quotidiè de Coelis venientes legūtut. Audiui lectas hic regias Epistolas. into whose voice and authoritie all the faithfull resolue their beleese concerning Christ and all his actions: and according to S. Agustine, In sanctis libris manifestatur Dominus, & ibi eius Ecclesia declaratur, Aug. Epift. 50. In the holy bookes of Scripture the Lord is made manifest, and in the same also his Church is declared: and in another E place, Aug. Ep. 166. [...] d. vnit. [...]. c. 3. Sunt certè libri Dominici, quorum authoritati [...] consentimus, [...], vtri­què seruimus, ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam, ibi discutiamus causam nostram. In Scripturis diuinis Christum, in Scripturis didicimus Ec­clesiam, In the Scriptures we haue learned Christ, and in the Scriptures we haue learned the Church. Now if the Scriptures [Page 70] manifest Christ, and demonstrate his Church, they are of grea­ter A authoritie [...]. [...]. Pentateuch. Fid. vol. 3. Dub. 10. c. 14. Comparatione hu­ius (id est) Scrip­turae, testimonium Ecclesiae dici [...] potest testimonium hominum, vtpote quod in rigore sermonis non obtinet proprie­tates & requisita ad rationem verbi Dei, &c. Ca. 15. Illud [...] est verbum Dei (quoad omnia & singu­la) ca. 14. Hoc verò ab extrinseco, &c., and consequently more credible, famous, and illustrious than the Church, according to the Iesuits Theorem out of Aristotle, Propter quod vnum quodquè tale est, & illud magis.

IESVIT. B

Fourthly, the Church is one, that is, all the Pastors and Preachers thereof deliuer, and consequently all her profes­sors and children beleeue, one and the same Faith.

ANSWER.

The visible Church in regard of the sound and liuing part thereof, is one both in Faith and Charitie Aug. c. Petil. Don. li. 2. c. 77. Te­nemus charitatem si amplectimur vni­tatem amplectimur autèm vnitatē, si ea non per verba nostra non in parte confingim', sed per verba Christi in vnitate cognoscimus. Id. Membra Christi per vnitatis charitatem sibi copulantur, & per eandem capiti suo cohaerent quod est Christus Iesus, &c. Theoder. Expos. Psal. 47. Communitèr omnes in vnam domum rediguntur ob consonantium veterum Dogmatum., Ephes. 4.3.4. &c. But this vnitie is more or lesse perfect Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. Fid. Vol. 1. Dub. 19. c. 3. Vnitas formalis & substantialis & vnitas perfectiua. at some times, and in C some persons than in other.

Vnitie in all Veritie, and in all sanctitie of Vertue and Cha­ritie is necessarie to Saluation, in praeparatione animi, in the pur­pose and intention of heart, Rom. 12. 18. and actuall Vnitie in fundamentall points of Faith, and in the maine offices of Cha­ritie D is simply necessarie to Saluation, Heb. 12.14. but perfect cōcord, excluding all discord, is not perpetually found amongst the best members of the visible Church Aug. c. Iul. li. 1. ca. 2. Alia sunt in quibus inter se [...] etiam do­ctissimi atquè opti­mi regulae Catho­licae defensoris, sal­ua fidei compage, non consentiunt & alius alio de vna re melius & verius di­cit. Hoc autèm vn­dè E nunc agimus ad ipsa fidei [...] fundamenta. Idem sup. Psal. 45. Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. Fid. p. 1. dub. 8. ca. 3. Cyprian. tr. d. laps. Inter alia peccata reperta in hominibus ad Ecclesiam [...] recenset animo­rum discordias & controuerfias.. There was conten­tion among the Disciples, Luc. 22.24. and the Affrican and Eu­ropean Churches were diuided concerning rebaptising Concil. Carthag. apud Cypt. & Ib. Pamel. Id. ep. 72. & 73. & 74. & 75. Eu­seb. Hist. Eccles. li. 7. c. 2.3, 4., and the Eastrne and Westerne Churches about the day of Easter Idem li. 5. c. 23.. S. Augustine saith, That good men being but proficients, may be at strife Aug. Proficientes autèm nondumquè perfecti, &c. d. [...] Dei, li. 15. ca. 5.. Aquinas affirmeth, That discord is not a sinne vnlesse it ouer­throw Charity, or be corrupted with error concerning matters of Faith which are necessarie to bee knowne to Saluation, or in smaller points [Page 71] with [...] Aquin. 22. q. 37. ar. 1. Cum intentio aliquorum fit ad a­liquod bonū, quod [...] ad honorē [...] accidens contra bonum [...] vel [...].. Also discord may happen in the visible A [...] by the pride, ambition, and faction of the [...] in which case, [...] persons, although they [...] and [...] all lawfull peace and [...], yet through the [...] of those which are enemies to peace [...] Hist. [...] Lib. 6. cap. 4. & [...] Constantini, Lib. 2. cap. 60. & 61. Greg. Nazianz. [...]. 12. [...], &c. Aug. sup. [...]. 45. Nondum [...] B nondum completum est. [...]. sup. Ezech. c. 4. Vereor ne ista [...] in nostra [...], in qua visio pacis cernitur, quam conteret Dominus quando irascitur, & indignos nos [...] &c. deficiente autem pane & [...] Ecclesiae [...] vir contra [...], & [...] discordia est, [...] nobis Christi tunicam, quam nec milites in passione saluatoris nisi sunt, &c., they cannot [...] it. [...]. 120.5, 6, 7.

IESVIT.

For if the Preachers and Pastors of the Church dis­agree about matters which they preach, as necessarie points of Faith, how can their Tradition and Testimonie be of Credit therein, or haue any Authoritie to persuade? who C will or canfirmely [...] disagreeing witnesses vpon their words?

ANSWER.

First, They which disagree in part, and accord in the maine, may haue substantiall [...], although they want the prefection of vnitie, and these are of credit, and may persuade in those things wherein they consent: as appeareth by S. Cyprian and his. Colleagues, disagreeing with the Romans touching Ap­peales D and [...], and yet conuerting many people to godlinesse.

Secondly, When there is discord betweene [...] in [...] matters, the Orthodox partie, [...] many ( [...] all those whose hearts the Lord [...] and mooueth Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. Lib. 4. c. 16. Ipsis quoque mini­stris sanctis homi­nibus vel etiam sanctis Angelis o­perantibus, nemo E recte discit quae pertinent ad [...] Deo nisi fiat a [...] docilis, &c. [...], Doctrinae tum prosunt [...] per [...] cum Dem [...] vt prosint, &c.) to dis­cerne and obey the truth: Otherwise, in the great Dissentions of the antient Church, reported by Eusebius, Lib. 2. cap. 60. & 61. d. vita Constantini [...]. Eo vsque diffudit sese vti non [...] hominum [...] licuisset. Eo [...] [...] Theatris [...] [...]., no people should haue beene conuer­ted to God.

[Page] Thirdly, If [...], take away all possibilitie of persua­ding, A from the Pastors of the Church, then the Romans, which [...] with [...] Ancestors in many points of Doctrine, and haue had so many Schismes (whereof some haue beene most bloudie and pernicious to the Christian World [...] Vno die centum & triginta septem cadauera peremptorum. Othe Frising. Chron. Lib. 6. cap. 22.) must want power to persuade. The efficacie of persuasion dependeth vp­on absolute concord onely, as vpon a greater motiue of credi­bilitie, and not as vpon a proper efficient: and although Prea­chers should be contentious, and factious, yet the Word of Christ truly deliuered by any of them, is in it selfe mightie in operation, and able to persuade August. d. Doctr. Christ. Lib. 4. cap. 27. Boni sideles non quemlibet hominum, sed ipsum Deum obedienter audiunt, &c. and conuert soules: and God B Almightie many times shewes his power in the Ministerie of infirme and imperfect Instruments. Phil. 1. 16, 17.

IESVIT.

And this consent must be conspicuous and euident: For if in outward appearance and shew, Preachers dissent one C from another in maine and materiall Doctrines, their Au­thoritie is crazed, and their Testimonie of no esteeme. Howsoeuer, perchance their Dissentions may by some distin­ctions so be coloured, that one cannot conuince him that would boldly vndertake to defend (as D. Field vnder­takes for Protestants) that their Dissentions are but ver­ball. But what is this to the purpose? Doe the accused Dissentioners allow this Doctors Reconciliation? [...] D they giue ouer Contention hereupon? No: but confesse that such Reconcilers misse of their meaning, and that they dis­agree substantially about the very prime Articles of Faith. How can these men be witnesses of Credit for substantiall Articles, concerning which there is open confessed and pro­fessed Dissention among them.

ANSVVER. E

The consent of Pastors according to one sence, to wit, ex­pounding Must, for [...], Ought (as 1. Tim. 3.2.) is to be con­spicuous and euident, both in Faith and in Charitie: and when this is fulfilled, the testimonie of Pastors is of greater weight [Page 73] and credit among men. But this perfection of Visitie is [...]: A and therefore although the same be [...] in part, the Pastors of the Church are not despoyled of all Authoritie and credit in deliuering Christs Word [...]. Alexandr. Strom. Lib. 7. f. 541. Primum ergo hoc aduersus nos addu­cunt dicentes non oportere credere, [...], &c. Fore [...] in [...] seminentur [...] vt in fi [...] Prophetice a Domino dictumest, & fieti non potest, vt non fiat id quod praedictum est esse futurum, &c. Num quispiam aegrotans, & qui vt curetur o­pus habet, non admittit Medicum propter eas quae sunt in medicina haereses, &c. Neque fi appositus sit fru­ctus, vnus quidem verus & maturus, a­lius vero factus ex cera quam maxime similis, propter simi­litudinem est absti­nendū ab vtroque, &c. Et quemadmo­dum si vna sit via Regia, & multae etiam aliae, ex quibus aliquae ferunt in praecipitium, &c. Cum oleribus. Hortensibus vna [...] nascutitur herbae, &c., if the better part of them obserue Vnitie in the Bond of Peace, in things essentiall, and in the common Rule of Faith. And although the qualitie of Teachers be a motiue of credibilitie, yet the power of per­suasion dependeth properly vpon the Word of Christ; and they which disagree in other matters, and with a common con­sent teach the maine and principall Doctrine of Faith, must therein be credited, because of the prime Author himselfe Bellarm. d. Concil. li. 2. c. 19. Non nititur salus Ecclesiae praecipue humana industria sed [...] Dei cum eius Rex sit Deus, &c.. B If humane frailetie, discord, and error in some things, should totally discredit the Authoritie of Teachers, the World must receiue no Diuine Veritie by the Ministerie of men, because a­mongst men, Non germinat granum Veritatis, sine palea Vanitatis, The good Seed of Veritie, springeth not without some Chaffe of Vanitie Gerson. d. Pace. consid. 3. Dried. d. Eccles. Dog. lib. 4. cap. 2. pa. 224. Ecclesia sub hac peregrinatione constituta, &c. nondum sine paleis & Zizanijs, &c. etiam in membris vi­uis. D. S. Cyprian, S. Augustine, S. Hierome, &c. disagree in some things, and Tertullian and Origen haue many errors, and therein are reprooued by others; and yet the rest of their Do­ctrine (wherein they teach truly) receiueth no preiudice from their contrarie errors. The Iesuits and Dominicans, and other C Scholasticks Cornel. Mus. com. Rom. 6. pag. 279. Vigebat Spinosa & molesta nescio quae Theologia de [...], de Relationibus, de Quidditatibus, &c. Tota pene aetas in hominum decretis quae inter se pugnantia [...], nullo tempore [...], alunt perpetuum per secula litem, conterebatur, &c. Is sublimis Theologus habebatur, qui maiora portenta pro suis Traditiunculis fingere sciat, &c. Hinc Sexcentae Sectae, Thomistae, Scotistae, Occha­mistae, Albertistae, Egidiani, Alexandrei, &c. O scelus, posthabebantur Euangelia, Epistolae, Christiana sapientia delitescebat, a paucissimis tradebatur, sed frigide, non dicam infincere, &c., desire to be esteemed credible Witnesses, and yet there is no small contention betwixt them, concerning sundrie Questions. Although therefore some dissention bee found among Teachers, yet their whole Doctrine is not there­by made incredible, neyther is there perpetually in the true Church a visible and perspicuous concord in all things.

In the words ensuing, the Aduersarie questioneth Doctor Field, because hee affirmeth, That Protestants Dissentions are not reall, but apparent and verball. Against this hee affirmeth, Greg. Naz. Orat. 13. Contentio inter nos fuit, male id quidem non [...] inficiabor (nec [...] Diabolo adi­tum [...] aut ansam nec improbis linguis libertatem dari oportuit) non [...] tanta quanta ijs [...], qui [...] nostras per calumniam insectantur. That so long as Contentioners rest vnsatisfied, and admit no Recon­ciliation, E saying, That Reconcilers haue missed of their meaning; it is vaine by distinctions to colour their Discord, &c.

[Page 74] [...]. First, To [...] Discord by distinctions, is no meanes A of true [...] but by [...] to discouer and manifest, that Contentioners [...] other, and whereas they speake diuersty in [...], yet they maintaine the same Veritie in sub­stance, this may be to good purpose.

Secondly, Although A [...] are many times froward, and will not for the present admit the charitable constructions of moderate persons Greg. Naz. Orat. 14. [...]. Quicunque [...] paci student, mediosque se profitentur, ab [...] male mulctantur, vtpote qui vel contemptui sint, vel etiam bello [...]., [...] to reconcile them, Exod. 2. 14. Act. 7.27. yet at the last, Vnitie may be effected by this meanes, and peaceable and moderate Christians ought in the B meane season to gather the faire Lilly of sauing Veritie, grow­ing amidst the Thornes of humane Infirmitie.

IESVIT.

Fiftly, I inferre, That this Church is vniuersall, spread ouer all Nations, that she may be said to be euery where mo­rally speaking, that the whole knowne World may take no­tice of her, as of a worthie and credible witnesse of Christian C Tradition, howsoeuer her outward glory and splendor, peace and tranquilitie, be sometimes obscured in some places, more or lesse, and not euer in all places at once.

ANSVVER.

The Church is vniuerfall: First, Because of time: for it con­tinueth successiuely in all Ages, Matth. 28.20. Luc. 1.33.

Secondly, In regard of Persons and Places, because no Countrey, Nation, State, Age, or Sex of People, are excluded D from being part of it, Galat. 3.20. Act. 10.34. Apoc. 5.9.

Thirdly, In respect of Faith, because Diuine Veritie, consti­tutiue, and which giueth being to the true Church, continueth throughout all Ages, 1. Pet. 1.25. Reuel. 14.6. and is found in all the parts of the true Church.

But notwithstanding this, the true Church is not perpetually vniuersall, in regard of actuall amplitude, and diffusion of visible Congregations, throughout all Nations, and inhabited. Coun­treyes of the World Card. [...]. Compend. cap. 37. [...] nostra, [...] a sul exordio, fuerit semper Cath & [...], vniuersitate puritatis, sanctitatis, & veritatis, non tamen vniuersitate dilatationis, &c.; for it may in some Ages, in actu exercito, and in regard of actuall residence, remaine onely in a few E Countreyes: and Cardinall Bellarmine Bellarm. d. Eccles. li. 4. c. 7. Quod [...] sola vna Prouincia retineret veram [...] adhuc vere & proprie Ecclesia diceretur Ca­tholica, dummodo clare ostenderetur, [...] esse vnam & candem cum illa quae fuit aliquo tempore vel diuersis, in toto mundo. graunteth, That if one [Page 75] sole Prouince of the World should retaine true Faith, yet the Church A might then be truly and properly called vniuersall, if it could manifestly be shewed that the same were one with that Church which was once vni­uersally spred ouer the world. And although Deiure, by right and according to the diuine Precept, the true Church should at all times remaine and continue in those regions where it was once planted; yet it happeneth by the malice and iniquitie of man, that those places which once were a Sanctuarie of holinesse, are afterwards changed into the habitation of Satan, Dried. d. Eccl. dog. li. 4. p. 2. c. 2. Per Haereticos A­rium, B Nestorium, Eunomium, Mahumetam, major pars veram Ecclesiam de seruit ad dogmata à traditione san­ctorum patrum aliena. and into a cage of vncleane Birds.

The Iesuit perceiuing that it is impossible to defend a perpe­tuall actuall vniuersalitie of the Church, presenteth vnto vs an imaginarie vniuersalitie: his words are, She may be said to be eue­rie where morally speaking, &c.

I answere: Morally speaking, the Church cannot be said to be, where it is altogether vnknowne, and where no meanes are vsed, or actions performed, which are sufficient to make it knowne. A king may morally be said to be in euery part of C his kingdome [...]. Mirand. Apol. q. 1. Rex ex­istens in Palatio, di­citur esse in alio lo­co prouinciae, vbi authoritate pote­statis suae, & impe­rio suo aliquid [...] operatur., because his lawes, ministers, and gouernment are extended throughout all his kingdome, and king Richard the first, when hee was in Syria Roger. Houeden. Annal. pars poster. in Richard. 1., might be said to be morally in England. But the true Church, in many ages, hath no com­merce with Infidels in things spirituall, mediate or immediate: the Faith, Preaching, and authoritie thereof, is altogether vn­knowne to many people, to wit, to the inhabitants of America for 1400. yeeres: to many other nations of Affrica and Eu­rope, for 600. yeeres, &c. And many people, which heare the fame of Christians in generall, as they doe of the Iewes, haue D no meanes to distinguish Orthodoxe Beleeuers from Here­tickes: and they which vnderstand not the Doctrine of the true Church, cannot take notice of her, as of a worthie and credible witnesse of diuine Tradition.

IESVIT.

A truth so cleare, that it may be euidently prooued out of Scripture, that euen in Antichrists dayes the Church E Apoc. 18. v. 8. shall be visibly vniuersall: for shee shall then bee euerie where persecuted; which could not bee, except shee were euerie where visible, and conspicuous euen to the wicked.

ANSVVER. A

Your former Proposition, concerning the perpetuall locall vniuersalitie of the Church, is as cleare, as the Sunne-shine at midnight; and the Arguments whereby you labour to prooue it, are of no force.

First, if it were granted that the true Church, in the raigne of Antichrist, should bee visibly vniuersall; yet it is inconse­quent: Ergo, The true Chnrch is perpetually and in all ages B visibly vniuersall. Separable accidents are sometimes present to the subiect, and sometimes absent: but visible vniuersalitie is a separable accident, as appeareth by the state of the true Church, in the first hundred yeere Card. [...]. Theolog. institut. compend. c. 37. Ecclesia tamen nostra licet à sui exordio semper fuerit Catholica & vniuersalis, vniuersitate puri­tatis, sanctitatis, & veritatis: non tamen [...] dilatationis..

Secondly, the words of Saint Iohn, Apoc. 20. 8. are: And when the thousand yeeres shall be consummate, Satan shall be loosed out C of his prison, and shall goe foorth and seduce the nations which are vp­on the foure corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, and shall gather them into battell, the number of whom is as the sand of the Sea.

In this Prophesie, nothing is deliuered which doth expresly or by consequence argue the visible vniuersalitie of the true Church in all ages. 1. The nations which are vpon the foure corners of the earth seduced by Satan, may be Infidels Riber. in Apoc. c. 20. p. 399. Seducet [...] ex vni­uersis orbis partib' multos, & in ijs Gog & Magog, &c., at least a great part of them, as well as Christians: and although Satan possessed & deceiued them before, yet now when he is loosed, he doth in a new manner, and by a greater efficacie of errour de­ceiue D them Dionis. Carthus. in Apoc. 20. ar. 21.. 2. The true Church may be persecuted vni­uersally by multitudes of enemies dispersed euery where, and yet remaine it selfe, in one or in few places; and it may also be persecuted, when it professeth and exerciseth religion in secret, Apoc. 12.14, 15. 3. Many learned Papists affirme, that in the dayes of Antichrist, true beleeuers shall cease to bee in many places, and the number of orthodoxall people shall be small, and the same shall professe their faith in secret, August. Tri­umph, Aug. [...]. Illo [...], Glossa dicit, par­ticulares Ecclesiae vndique per orbem diffusae subtrahent se ab obedientia Romani Pontificis, ita [...] pauci ei obediant & Papa tunc temporis circa partes Italiae se recludet cum paucis, alijs ab obedientia eius substractis. sum. d. Eccles. pot. q. 21. ar. 4. At that time particular Churches diffused farre and neere ouer the world, shall withdraw them­selwes E from the obedience of the Romane Pope, and few shall obey him, and the Pope himselfe at that time, shall with a few keepe himselfe [Page 77] [...] the [...] of [...], others being [...] from his [...]. A The like is affirmed by Occham Occham. dial. p. 1. l. 5. c. 30., [...] [...]. sum. d. [...]. c. 30., [...] Caiet. Luc. 18. v. 8. [...] [...]. d. Antichristo li. 8. c. 8. 9.12., and Barradias Barrad. Harm. Euang. tb. 3. lib. 4. cap. 12. Hieron. sup.-Soph. c. 2. De Ecclesia videtur prima fronte esse blasphemum, quod ea futura fit inuia, & de­serta B & bestiae habitent in ea, &c. Sed si quis considerauerir [...] Apostolicum in quo dicitur, in nouisimis temporibus instabunt tempora pesima, &c. Necnon quod in Euangelio Scriptum est, quod multiplicata iniqui­tate [...] charitas multorum, in tantum vt illo tempore compleatur verumamen veniens filius homi­nis putas [...] fidem super terram? non mirabitur de extrema Ecclesiae vestitate quae regnante Antichristo tradenda sit in solitudinem, &c.. Now this former affertion, which is the common Tener of Papists, agreeth not with the speech of our Aduersarie, when he saith, That in the dayes of Antichrist, the Church shall be euerie where visible and con­spicuous, euen to the wicked: and he must reuoke his bold [...] in his first words; A truth so cleare that it may euidently be prooued, &c.

IESVIT.

The reason of this perpetuall visible vniuersalitie is, because the Tradition of the Church, is as I haue proo­ued, C the sole ordinarie meanes to ground faith on for substantiall points. Wherefore this Tradition must bee so deliuered, as that it may bee knowne to all men, see­ing God will haue all men (without any exception of nation) to bee saued, and to come to the knowledge of Truth, 1. Timothie 2. 4. But if the Church were not still so diffused in the world, that all knowne nations may take notice of her, all men could not be saued. D

ANSWER.

Although the teaching and Tradition of the Church, is the first Introduction, to leade people vnto the knowledge of the grounds of saluation, and the ordinarie meanes whereby they receiue the holy Scriptures, and rule of Faith contai­ned in the same (which is all you haue or can prooue Cassand. def. Iib. d. Offic. Pij. Viri. pag. 821. A quibus hanc Tra­ditionem accepimus, testes sunt [...], caelestis Doctrinae.) yet hence it followeth not, that the true Church is visibly vniuer­sall E in all places of the world.

First, you are reprooued by the example of the Indians, and [Page 78] people inhabiting the New found World who are Gods crea­tures A and reasonable men, formed [...] his image, capable of grace and [...] as well as other men, and included within the latitude of [...] promises, [...]. [...] recte dici [...] iftos ad promissio­nem Dei [...] per­tinere. Non enim Romanos sed om­nes genres Domi­nus, semini [...], media [...] iuratione [...]. Math. 28.19. Marc. 16.15. Call. 2.28. Call. 3.11, and the Apostles speech, 1. [...]. [...]. 4. God will [...] all men to be [...] &c, [...] them as well as others. And yet notwithstanding, the true Church whose Tradition (according to your position) is the sole ordinarie meanes to ground Faith on, was not for many ages either Actu­ally or Moraily visible, vniuersall, or any waies made knowne to them. B

It seemes by the conclusion of your Argument, wherein you insert these words, That all knowne nations, &c. that you obserued this, but you are no way able to cleere the difficultie: for if because S. Paul saith, God wil haue all men to be saued, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, the true Church must in all age be visibly vniuersall, then the same must be so in regard of the na­tions inhabiting the New found world, because S. Pauls words, God will haue all men to be saued, and come to the knowledge of the Truth, are vniuersall (according to your exposition) and must be vnderstood without limitation, or respect of persons. C

Secondly, when S. Paul saith, God wil haue all men to be saued, &c. He [...] according to the antecedent wil of God (as learned Papists commonly maintaine.) But Aquinas p. 1. q. 19. ar. 6. ad. 1. & 1. sent. d. 47. ar. 2. & d. verit. q. 23. ar. 3. Ri­chard. 1.47. ar. 1. q. 1. Scot. 1. d. 46. q. vnic. Occham, Gabriel. lb. q. 1. Bonauent. Du­rand. Herueus, Ca­preolus. this antecedent Will (ac­cording to some learned Papists) is no formall Will in God, but is only improperly and metaphorically so called Soto. Maior. com. 1. Tim. 2.4. pa. 274. De voluntate antecedenti, id est imaginaria & secū ­dum quid, impro­priè vel metapho­ricè dicta. Bannes 1. q. 19. art. 6. Zumel. 1. q. 19. art. 6. and ac­cording to others, which say it is a formall Will, the same pro­duceth not vniuersally either grace of outward calling to Saluation, or inward grace in them that are externally called, and therefore it is inconsequent to argue, from this manner of D Gods willing all men to be saued, That the true Church is in all ages visibly vniuersall. 1. Aquinas, and others say, that the antecedent will of God is only a velleitie [...] 1. q. [...]. ar. 6. ad. 1. Magis dici [...]. [...]. lb. pa. 595. Voluntas E [...] semper est voluntas inefficax, siue secundum quid, quae vocatur velleitas. or wishing that the thing might be, a complacencie in a thing considered ab­stractiuely and without other circumstances [...]. in. 1. p. Tho. q. 19. [...]. 6. Disp. 56. nu. 18. Pius d. Ponte Ibid. dub. 3. Cordub. lib. 1. q. 56. Aluar. d. Auxil. disp. 34. nu. 3. Meclin. in. 1. p. Tho. q. 19. art. 6. sect. 2., and that vpon it alone the Saluation of no man followeth. 2. The same is ge­nerall in respect of all Chrys. sup. Rom. Serm. 2. Quemadmodùm enim in Sole & Lu­na, [...], vbi neque [...] neque [...] amplius aliquid contributum est, sed aequa omnibus concessa fruitio: ita & in Euangelica doctrina, imò in hac tantò plenius quantò illa reliquis om­nibus necessaria magis [...]. and euery singular and indiuiduall per­son, and God by his antecedent will wisheth the Saluation of [Page 79] [...] A [...] by experience, that [...] Will, all [...] and singular persons: [...] by the ministerie of the true Church and that whole countries and nations for [...] ages [...] of the same, Prosper. d. lib. arb. ad Ruffin. Ne­que enim remotum est ab inspectione communi quot se­culis, quam innu­mera [...] lia [...] vera cognitione defecerint. Aug. epist. 80. Sunt apud nos hoc est in Africa Barbarae [...] gentes, in quibus nondum est praedicatum [...]. Id. [...]. 78. Quantae [...] adhuc [...] sine [...] Euangelio, &c. Quod remansit gentium, vbi nondum est Euangelium praedicatum. Origen. in Math. [...]. 28. [...] non [...], sed etiam nostrarum gentium, [...] nunc non [...] Christianitatis verbunt. Non­dum est praedicatum Euangelium regni in [...] orbe. Quid autem dicamus de Britannis, [...] Germanis, qui [...] circa [...] apud Barbaros, Dacos, & [...], & Scythas, quorum [...] audierunt [...] gelij verbum, &c. and some countries [...] the preaching of the Gospell sooner, and others latter, some haue been [...] in one age, and some in another. 4. Gods antecedent Will is alwaies the same: and [...] to it he [...] the Saluation of all men in the time of the Old Testa­ment, Ezek. 33.11. B

Now from the former positions, it followeth, that S. Pauls words, 1. Tim. 2.4. God will haue all men to be saued, &c. do not [...] that the true Church is visibly vniuersall in all C ages, since the Ascension of Christ, and the preaching of the Apostles.

For if the antecedent will of God (of which S. Paul spea­keth, 1. Tim. 2.4.) be onely a velleitie and complacencie about mans Saluation abstractiuely considered [...]. d. [...] disp. 34. nu. 3. Si consideretur falus reproborum secun­dum se & absolutè sic est à Deo [...]. Si autem [...] quod [...] pri­uationem, [...] splendoris [...] eius in electis sic non est volita à Deo. and if it respect sin­gular and indiuiduall persons as well as whole nations, and not­withstanding the same, many singular persons and whole nati­ons haue beene destitute (and that for a long space of time) of all meanes of conuersion and outward calling to Christianitie: and if the same Will, for some large tract of time, produceth D no external effect sufficient to conuert Infidels Lichet 2. sent. d. 47. q. vnic. Velle [...] quo ita placet volitum, quod tamen voluntas tale volitum non ponat in esse licet posset ponere illud in esse., then it follow­eth that the true Church, which is the onely ordinarie teacher of sauing veritie, is not visibly vniuersall in all places of the world in euery age.

The minor is prooued from the foure propositions former­ly deliuered. E

The sequell is euident by the exposition which our Aduer­saries deliuer of S. Pauls text, vnderstanding the same of the antecedent will of God, and from the position of the [...] deliuered in this section, which is, That the Tradition and Prea­ching of the true visible Church, is the sole ordinarie meanes to leade [Page 80] people to the knowledge of sauing Truth. For if the antecedent will A of God is not a certaine and infallible cause, that all people shal at all times haue the preaching of sauing Veritie by the mini­sterie of the true visible Church: then it is not necessarie, that because God will haue all men to be saued by his antecedent will, therefore the true Church must in all ages be visibly vni­uersall.

A contingent cause vndetermined, doth not produce or argue a constant, certaine, and necessarie effect.

The antecedent will of God is a contingent cause [...]. quest. 1. Schol. d. diu. vol. ar. 7. nu. 5. Cōtingentia dicitur de omni [...] quod potest esse & non esse, &c. Nequè opus est vt in hac latitudine denotet imperfectionem aliquam seu mutabilitatem, sed causam ità potentem operari vt in eius voluntate sit operari, aut non operari, Scotus. dist. 39. q. Vnic. Voluntas diuina nihil aliud re­spicit necessario pro obiecto, ab essentia sua: ad quodlibet igitur aliud contingentèr se habet. in respect of the perpetuall visible vniuersalitie of the Church. Ergo B

The antecedent will of God doth not produce or argue a perpetuall visible vniuersalitie of the Church.

For if notwithstanding the antecedent will of God, many singular persons and whole nations may be for some space of time destitute of outward calling by the ministerie of the C Church, and of all morall possibilitie for that space of time of the hauing thereof, and are not guiltie of the sinne of infideli­tie, because without any speciall demerit of their owne, they are destitute of the word of Faith, (as it is maintained by Aqui­nas Aquinas. 22. q. 10. ar. 1. Bannes. lb. Victoria. d. Indis. Relect. 5. nu. 8. and his followers) then the antecedent will of God is only a contingent cause, in respect of producing & arguing out­ward calling by the ministerie of the Church, and consequent­ly of the perpetuall visible vniuersalitie of the true Church.

But the first is true, as appeareth by the Indies Acosta. d. proc. Indorum. Sal. li. 1. c. 5. p. 133. Multos esse homines suis tene­bris relictos, occul­to Dei, veroquè [...], negare non possumus, ne (que) ho­mines modo, sed & familias, & vrbes, & integras saepe prouincias & gentes. Qui & olim fuerunt & nunc vsquè sunt sine Chri­sto, &c. before Co­lumbus arriuing in their coasts, and by many barbarous people D and nations liuing in remote regions, and hauing no preachers of the Gospell sent vnto them, before the two hundred, fiue hundred, or six hundred yeare after Christ, Ergo,

The latter is also true.

IESVIT.

Sixtly, this Church is holy both in life and doctrine: ho­ly E for life, shining in all excellent and wonderfull sanctitie, such as the Apostles gaue example of, as Pouertie, Chasti­tie, Obedience, Virginitie, Charitie, in vndergoing labours for the helpe of Soules, Fortitude, in suffering heroicall [Page 81] Martyredomes, Zeale and Patience in the rigorous trea­tie A of their bodies, by miraculous Fasting, and other au­sterities.

ANSVVER.

Sanctitie is a propertie and inseperable qualitie of the true Church in respect of all the liuing members thereof, Cant. 4. 7. Eph. 5.26, 27. 1. Cor. 14.33. Rom. 1.7. Eph. 1.18. & c. 4.12. Phil. 4.21. Coll. 1.12. 1. Cor. 6.11. 1. Iohn 3.18. B

And the same is called holy. First, Because it is clensed and washed from the guiltinesse of sinne by the immaculate blood of Christ Turrecr. sum, d. Eccles. lib. 1. ca. 9. Sanctum idem est quod sanguine tin­ctum vel [...] siue emundatū &c. Huius significatio­nis genere, maxime Dei Ecclesia sancta appellanda venit, quae sanguine Chri­sti respersa, purifi­cationem peccato­rum accepit, & de­corem induit san­ctitatis. Card. Moni­lian. Theolog. com­pend. c. 36. Dicitur sancta quasi san­guine Christi tincta: Christus enim eam lauit à peccatis suis, in sanguine suo. Eph. 5.26., Apoc. 1.5. Heb. 10.10. & c. 13.12. Secondly, Be­cause it is pertaker of the holinesse of Christ the head thereof by Grace, 1. Cor. 1.30. Ephes. 5.30. Iohn 17.19. Heb. 12.10. and because of the speciall inhabitation and operation of the holy Ghost August. sup. Psalm. 45., Ephes. 1.13. 1. Cor. 3.17. 1. Thessal. 4.8. 2. Tim. 1. 14. Thirdly, Because it is called and consecrated vnto holi­nesse, 2. Tim. 1.9. 1. Pet. 2.9. 1. Thessal. 4.7. Apoc. 1.6. Fourth­ly, Because the Faith, Doctrine, Lawes, Sacraments, and Reli­gion C thereof are holy Cordub. Arma. Fid. q. 1. Propos. 2. Bellarm. d. Ecclesia li. 4. ca. 11. Greg. Val. tom. 3. disp. 1. punct. 7. Bannes 22. q. 1. ar. 10. fo. 100. August. sup. Psal. 85. Accepit gratiam sanctitatis, [...] Baptismi, & [...] pec­catorum.. Iud. v. 20. 2. Pet. 2.20. Tit. 3.5. Fiftly, Because the vertues and actions thereof are truely and indeed holy, whereas the vertues of Infidels which liue out of the Church are prophane and vnholy, as bearing the image of ver­tue, but wanting the true forme and fruit thereof Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 5. cap. 10. & li. 19. c. 25. & Enchir. c. 75. & sup. Ioh. tr. 76. & d. fid. & operib. c. 7. & d. verb. Dom. Serm. 12. & d. Temp. s. 32. Prosp. sent. 106. & d. Vit. Contempl. li. 3. c. 1. & d. voc. Gent. li. 1. c. 3. & d. lib. Arb. ad Ruffin. &c. Collator. pa. 149. Gregor. Armin. 2. d. 26. q. 1. Capreol. 2. d. 28. ad. 3. & d. 41. pa. 569. Cassalius, d. D quadrip. Iust. li. 1. c. 3. pa. 157..

But our Aduersarie passeth by these causes and reasons of the sanctitie of the Church, being proper and essentiall (which are deliuered in the holy Scripture) and will haue the same to be reputed holy, because of monasticall vowes of Pouertie, Obedience, and Chastitie, and for externall Fastings, Whip­pings, wearing of Haire-cloth, and other bodily exercises which some Heremites and Cloysterers performe in the Ro­man Church.

Touching this Assertion we are to obserue. E

First that the Iesuit doth onely affirme these things, but bringeth no proofe, and therefore it were sufficient for me to say with S. Hierom [...]. [...]. sup. Mat. c. 23. Quod de Scripturis non habet authoritatem eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur, That which wanteth [Page 82] authoritie from the Scriptures, may as well bee despised, as A receiued.

Secondly, when the principall Doctors of the Romish Church, deliuer the causes why the true Church is stiled Holy, they either omit these externall exercises, or else onely men­tion them as accessarie, Turrccrem. sum. d. Eccles. l. 1. c. 9. Cordub. Arma. fid. q. 1. propos. 2. Bannes. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. Bellarm. d. Ec­cles. l. 4. c. 11. Greg. Val. to. 3. Disp. 1. punct. 7.

Thirdly, these exercises are common to hypocrites and he­retickes, and they make not people holy and good which vse B them, and the Church may bee holy without them, and there­fore they are no constitutiue parts, or essentiall properties of the sanctitie of the Church. That the same are common, ap­peareth by the example of the Pharisees Epiph. c. Haer. c. 16. Quidā decé, &c. sibi annorū spaciū praefigebant quibus [...] aut ca­stitatem colorent: hoc tempus conti­nuis precibus tra­ducebant, & id cer­taminis frequenti restaurabant, &c. Alij super tabulas dodrantales, &c. Alij super pauimen­tum, & alij collectos calculos substerne­bant, &c. Alij spi­nas, &c., and of many He­retickes Montanistae. Euchitae. Apostolici., which vsed these exercises with great austeritie, and yet they were no sound parts of the holy Catholicke Church. And that the Church may be holy without these exercises, is manifest, by reason and example. The Church which wanteth these things, may haue all the causes of sanctitie, to wit, Faith, Hope, Charitie, Regeneration, remission of sinnes, &c. There­fore it may bee holy without them. And the Church of the C Hebrews, to which Saint Paul wrote his Epistle, was an holy Church, yet Saint Chrysostome Chrys. [...]. 25. in moral. sup. Ep. Heb. saith: [...], &c. There was not so much as any footstep of a Monke, &c.

Fourthly, these monasticall vowes haue many times distai­ned and corrupted the Church: and therefore they are no mayne or proper actions of holinesse. Aluares Pelagius Planct. Eccles. li. 2. Ar. 54. fol. 176. col. 3. saith of the Monkes and Cloysterers of his age: that they were Paupertatis professores, sed haereditatum successores: Professours of pouertie, and heires apparant to euerie mans land. Ma­thew D Paris In Henrico 3. fol. 592. saith, That the Mendicants in England raised stately buildings, equall to Princes palaces, and they hoorded vp inualua­ble treasure, &c. And Papirius Masson d. Episc. vrbis. l. 6. in Clement. 5. saith, Pouertie which re­ligious Orders seeme to professe, is more hatefull to them than to any other sort of men.

The vow of Chastitie made the most of them more im­pure than dogs, and to stinke before God and men. That many of them were Sodomites, is affirmed by no meaner man than Saint Bernard Bernard. d. con­uers. ad Cleric. c. 29. Post fornicationes, post adulteria, post incestus, nec ipsa quidem apud ali­quos ignominiae passiones & [...] opera desunt, &c. Nunquid non [...] ciuitates illae huius spur citiae ma­tres, diuino prae damnatae iuditio & incendio de letae [...], &c. Multi nec latere queunt prae multitudine nec prae impudentia quaerunt., who saith, Besides fornication, a­dulterie, E and incest, the deedes of ignominie and turpitude, for which the cities of Sodome and Gomorrha were predamned, are not [Page 83] wanting, &c. Rodericus, a famous Bishop, saith Rodericus, spe­cul. hum. vitae, lib. 2. c. 19. Nec vna vni sufficit muliercula, nisi retentam ha­beat domi vt vxo­rem, Concubinas vero & Adolescen­tulas quarum non est numerus, pag. 305., That Votaries A and Regulars were not satisfied with one woman, but kept Concubines and young Damosells sans number. Alphonsus Castro saith Alphons. [...]. d. Haer-punit. lib. 3. c. 5. Tam frequens [...] est Sacerdotum incontinentia vt si quis illorum castus esse sciatur, quam­uis multa alia illi desint necessaria, ob hoc solum, sanctus a populo habeatur., The incontinencie of Priests is in these dayes so frequent, that if but one of them be knowne to liue chastly, although many other necessarie [...] lities be wanting in him, he is esteemed a holy man by the people for this one qualitie. Aluares Pelagius saith Aluar. Pelag. d. planct. Eccles. lib. 2. art. 51. Sed hodie Cellulae nostrorum Anachoritarū Hy­pochriticarum, à mulierculis visitan­tur: quod eis saepe, &c., That the Cells of An­chorites were dayly visited by women. And in another place Artic. 27. Per plurimos annos de latere Concubinae qualibet die surgunt., Priests for many yeeres together doe arise euerie day from their Con­cubines sides, and without going to Confession, say Masse. And in B another place Artic. 7. Apoc. 18. Custodia omnis immundi spiritus: quia intra Ecclesiam omnia peccata inueniuntur hodie quae immunda dicun­tur, &c. Quis enim Clericorum intra sanctam Ecclesiam Castitatem seruat per pauci sunt hodie Presbyteri, maxime in Hispania & regno Apuliae, qui cum sint publici Concubinarij, &c. Nihilominus tota die celebrant, & dant Ecclesiastica Sacramenta., Quis Clericorum intra sanctam Ecclesiam, Casti­tatem seruat? What Clerke is there within the holy Church, which obserueth Chastitie? And againe, There be few Priests in these dayes, in Spaine and Apulia, which doe not openly foster Con­cubines. Dionysius Carthusian saith Dionys. Carthus. c. Plural. Ben. art. 13. Pet. Blesen. Serm. in Synodo. Quidam focarias habent, quidam alienis abutuntur vxoribus, sicut trahit sua quemque voluptas. Idem. Serm. ad Sacerd. Videmus hodie Sacerdotes cum filijs Eli fuscinulas tenentes & cum mulieribus in atrio Tabernaculi, excubantes: & facti sunt equi Emissarij. Vnusquisque ad vxorem proximi hinniebat. Videmus hodie Sacerdotes sedentes cum Baltazar in Conniuijs cum Vxoribus & Concubinis abutentes vasis Domino consecratis., Paucissimi eorum proh dolor, continenter viuunt; Few of them (out alas) liue continently. And S. Bridget the Nunne in her Reuelation saith Re­uel. Bridg. l. 6. c. 35. Paucissimi inueniuntur alij & tam pauci vt vix vnus reperitur in centum., Not one among a hundred. And the same Bridget speaking of Nunnes, saith Lib. 4. c. 33. Portae indifferenter Clericis & Laicis quibus placet sororibus introitum dare etiam in ipsis noctibus sunt apertae. Et ideo talia loca fimiliora sunt Lupanaribus quam sanctis Claustris. Gerson. to. 1. declar. def. Ecclesiae, pag. 208. D Oculos apperite & inquirite, si quae hodie Claustra Monialium facta sunt quasi prostibula meretricum. Nichol. Clemang. d. corrup. stat. Eccles. Quid obsecro aliud sunt hoc tempore puellarum [...], nisi quaedam non dico Dei Sanctuaria, sed veneris execranda prostibula, sed lasciuorum [...] ad libidines explendas recepta­cula, vt idem sit hodie puellam velare quod & publice ad scortandum impellere. Onus, Eccles. c. 22. §. 12. Adeo propatula, vt ipsa loca veneris prostibulo sint similiora quam Dei sacrario: hinc procacitas, stuprum, incestus [...] sacratarum., Talia loca similiora sunt Lupanaribus, quam sanctis Cellis; Such places are more like Brothelhouses and common Stewes, than holy Cells. C

The Vow of Pouertie brought forth perpetuall Theft and Rapine, and that from the Widow and fatherlesse. The Vow of Chastitie filled all the Earth with the steame of Brothel­some impuritie: and the Vow of blind Obedience, caused hatefull and direfull Murthers, euen of Kings, and Gods an­nointed; E Concerning whom, the holy Prophet saith, Touch not mine annointed: and the sacred Historie reports to all po­steritie, That Dauids heart smote him, because he cut off a piece of the Kings Garment.

[Page 84] These voluntarie Exercises and Deuotions carrie a great A shew of perfection and merit among worldly people, euen as the Pharisaicall will-worship in ancient time did: But yet ex­perience taught them (which beheld these things in the height of their pride) that the more these Vowes and religious Or­ders encreased, the more Ignorance, Infidelitie, Iniquitie, and all manner of Plagues multiplyed in the World. Antonin. sum. Histor. p. 3. tit. 23. c. 9. §. 5 [...]. [...] Quidam dixit Vincentio, quid fuit quod postquam fratres praedicatores, & minores venerunt in mundum nunquam fuit bonum tempus, &c. [...], Eccles. c. 8. §. 4. Abbas Ioach. Vbertinus, d. Casalis. Bridget. Reuel. Extrauag. c. 83. B.

IESVIT.

This sanctitie shineth not in all the Children of the Church, but in the more eminent Preachers, and Profes­sors: which kind of sanctitie, together with Miracles, if the Church did want, she could not be a sufficient Witnesse of Truth vnto Infidels, who commonly neuer begin to af­fect C and admire Christianitie, but vpon the fight [...] sucb wonders of sanctitie, and other extraordinarie workes.

ANSWER.

Sanctitie of Grace (which is a perpetuall propertie of the true Church) shineth in all the sound and liuing members of the Church, Phil. 2. 15. And whereas the measure and degrees thereof are [...], the most eminent degree of sanctitie is not D alwayes found in Preachers, or in Popes, and greater Prelates, or in persons professing Monasticall life; but the same may be equall, or greater, in Lay persons, or in people of meane e­steeme: as appeareth by the state of the Iewish Church, in the dayes of Esay, cap. 1.9. and of the Pharisees, at such time as our Sauiour was incarnate. Dominicus Bannes, a famous Schoole-man, treating of the sanctitie of the Church, saith Bannes. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. p. 101. Sum­mus Pontifex rati­one status & obli­gationis dicitursan­ctissimus licet actu non sit talis. Sym­mechus, Papa, d. 40. cap. 1. Non nos. [...]. Can. Miss. Lect. 49. &c., That the supreame Bishop, the Pope, is said to be most holy, because of his State and Office, although indeed hee is not so. Rode­ricus speaking of the Clergie of his times, saith [...]. Episc. Zamor. Speculum, vit. Lib. 2. cap. 20. pag. 316., Rectores E moderni, non Pastores, sed raptores, ouium tonsores, non ad viridia pascua ductores, non piscatores, sed negotiatores, non dispensatores [Page 85] bonorum crucifixi, sed voratores, &c. Our moderne Church-men A are not Pastors, but Raueners; they fleece their Sheepe, and lead them not to the greene Pastures; they are not stewards, but deuourers of the goods of Christ crucified, &c. And Laurent. Iustinianus saith Laur. Iust. d. compunct & planct. Christi, pag. 575. Clericorum [...] maxima pars, [...] iacet voluptatibus, & be­stiarum more, quasi degentium parum ab illa secularium illorum conuersatio distat. Incedunt quotidie per plateas, &c. Theatris & spectaculis intersunt & [...] vacant & nugis, &c. tanquam extranei vineam Domini derelinquunt, inemendabiles permanent, [...] gerunt cor, obturatas habent aures, sine intellectu sunt syllabarum, tantum proferentes [...], ab omni spi­rituali deficiunt gustu., The greatest part of Priests and Clerkes in our dayes liue voluptuously, and after the manner of Beasts. Paucissimi reperiuntur qui honestè viuunt, rariores autem, qui pabulum salutis gregibus valeant praebere fidelium; Verie few are found, which lead an honest life; and a farre smaller number of such, as are able to minister the food of saluation to their flockes. B

In the next words our Iesuit affirmeth, That if the Church wanted the sanctitie aforesaid, together with Miracles, shee could not be a sufficient witnesse of Truth to Infidels, &c.

This Assertion, concerning the perpetuitie, and absolute ne­cessitie C of Miracles in all Ages, is repugnant to the Fathers August. sup. [...]. 130. Nec ideo mo­do non datur spiri­tus sanctus, quia linguis non loquuntur qui credunt. Ideo enim [...] oportebat vt linguis loquerentur, vt significarent omnes gen­tes credituras, vbi impletum est quod significabatur, miraculum ablatum est., and to many learned Papists, and it is voluntarily affirmed by our Aduersarie.

First, If the gift and power of Miracles were perpetuall, and inseparable from the true [...] in all Ages, this would appeare by some reuelation, or promise of holy Scripture, as well as other gifts and priuiledges of the same. But there is no D reuelation, or promise, concerning perpetuitie of the gift of Miracles, more than of the gift of Tongues, or of Prophesie, or the giuing of the Holy Ghost, by imposition of Hands August. c. Don­lib. 3. c. 16. Neque [...] & [...] attestantibus, per manus [...] modo datur Spiritus Sanctus, &c. Xauer. lib. 3. ep. 5. Si nos linguam calleremus Iaponicam, non [...] quin [...] fierent Christiani, faxit Deus vt breui eam addiscamus, tum demum aliquam Christianae Rei [...] operam, nam [...] quidem inter eos tanquam mutae [...] versamur. Greg. Moral. lib. 34. c. 3. Stunic. d. Relig. lib. 1. c. 14. Modo a nobis signa atque Prodigia non sunt postulanda, &c. [...]. Summa. praedic. Ver. Fides, E art. 9. Delrio. Disq. Mag. to. 2. lib. 4. c. 4. quaest. 5. sect. 2. pa. 683., &c. And these gifts were neuer promised in the Scripture to be perpetuall, and are long since ceased. August. Retrac. Lib. 1. cap. 13.

Secondly, The Fathers which liued since the foure hundreth yeere, affirme, That outward Miracles, such as the Apostles [Page 86] wrought, were [...] Chrys. in 1. Co­rinth. Hom. 6. Mo­ral. Quanto certio­res & magis neces­sariae res sunt, tanto fides est minor, & hoc est [...] signa in praesentia non fiant. Idem, sup. Ioh. Hom. 23. Sunt sane & hac nostra aetate qui quaerant, quare & nunc figna non fiunt? Si fidelis es vt [...], si Chri­stum diligis vt diligendus est, non indiges signis, signa enim in credulis dantur. in their dayes, and not absolutely neces­sarie A for after times: Gregor. Moral. 27. cap. 11. & Lib. 34. cap. 2. & super Euang. Hom. 29. August. d. vera Relig. cap. 25. & d. Ciuit. Dei, Lib. 22. cap. 8. & sup. Psal. 130. Chrysost. in Matth. Hom. 4. & Imperfect. in Matth. Hom. 49. & sup. 1. Timoth. Hom. 10.

Thirdly, Many learned Papists hold, That the gift of Mira­cles B is rare, and vnnecessarie, in these later times: Abulensis, Le­uit. cap. 9. q. 14 Abul. Leuit. 9. q. 14. In [...] Ecclesia [...] ista necessaria, ad intro­ducendam fidé E­uangelij, nunc au­tem quia sufficien­ter introducta est, non oportet mira­cula vlla esse., Trithemias Abbas, Lib. 8. Q. ad Imperat. Max. q. 3. Roffensis, c. Luther. a. Captiu. Babylon. c. 10. n. 4. pag. 81. Acosta, d. Procur. Indorum Salut. Lib. 2. cap. 8. pag. 218 Acosta. Non so­lum Signorum vis C nostris temporibus deest, verum pro ijs etiam scelera vbique vigent.. Stella in Luc. cap. 11. Cornel. Muss. Conc. Dominic. Pentecost. pag. 412. And some of them censure the reporters of Miracles, as Im­postors, and grosse Fabulers and Lyars. Gerson. Lib. c. Sect. Flagellantium. Canus, Loc. Lib. 11. cap. 6 [...]. Nec ego hic libri illius authorem excuso qui speculum exemplorum scribitur, nec historiae eius quae Legenda aurea nuncupatur. In illo enim mira­culorum monstra saepius quam vera miracula legas. Hanc scripsit homo ferrei oris & plumbei pectoris.. Ludouicus Viues, Erasmus, Occham, Espenceus Espenc. in 2. Timoth. 4. Digr. 21. pa. 150. &c..

Fourthly, If Infidels cannot be assured, that the Wonders which they outwardly behold, are the workes of the true God Acost. d. Proc. Indor. Sal. li. 2. c. 9. Et si in praesentia signa viderentur, quis tamen persua­deret? quis exter­norum aures nobis accomodaret, cum tantopere increbre­scat malitia?, and if the same may be the illusions of the Deuill [...]. sup. Ex­od. cap. 7. [...] p. 11. Hinc aperte cognoscitur, multa videri miracula, quae non sunt, & proprium esse Diaboli, &c. simulare Prophetiam, & miracula.; then the operations of such Miracles can be no infallible argu­ment of Veritie, and consequently, no meanes of conuerting Infidels. But Bellarmine affirmeth Bellarm. d. Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 14. Ante probationem Ecclesiae non est euidens aut certum, [...] fidei de vilo [...], quod sit verum miraculum. Non constat [...] certitudine cui non possit subesse falsum non esse illusionem [...]. Acosta, d. Proc. Indor. Sal. lib. 2. cap. 9. Denique quid magnorum signorum consirmatione opus est, vbi potius [...] acutior [...], quae altitudinem doctrinae nostrae aliqua [...]? Greg. val. sup. Thom. tom. 3. Disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 4. pag. 99. Ipsa miracula per se, non ef­ficiunt certitudinem infallibilem de doctrina, &c. Biel. in Can. [...]. Lect. 49. X. Miracula [...] E fiunt operatione Daemonum, ad fallendum inordinatos cultores, Deo permittente, & exigente talium infide­litate., That before the approba­tion D of the Church (which Infidels know not) it is not euident and certaine by Faith, concerning any Miracle, that the same is true, and Diuine; and it is possible for the same to be an illusion of Sathan.

IESVIT. A

Holy for doctrine, in regard her Traditions be diuine and holy, without any mixture of errour.

ANSVVER.

The Church which buildeth it selfe vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Eph. 2.20. And which heareth the voyce of Christ, Iohn 10.27. is holy, both for life and doctrine. B But as holinesse of life is compatible with some kind of sinne, 1. Iohn 1.8. Euen so sanctitie of doctrine excludeth not all er­rour. S t. Augustine, a man as holy as any since the Apostles, saith, August. d. A­nimi. orig. c. 1. Ne­que enim negare debeo sicut in ipsis moribus, ita multa esse in tam multis opusculis meis, quae possunt iusto iuditio & nulla temeritate culpari. I must not deny, but that as in my manners; euen so in my workes and writings, many things may iustly, and without any temeritie be reprehended.

IESVIT. C

For if the Church could deliuer, by consent of Ancestors: together with truth, some errours; her Traditions, euen about truth, were questionable, and could not bee beleeued vpon the warrant of her Tradition.

ANSWER.

If Ancestors may erre and be deceiued, then the later Church may vpon their reports deliuer some errours, together with D truth, and yet the Tradition thereof, concerning matters which are grounded vpon diuine Testimonie, is infallible Hieron. sup. Ag­geum c. 1. Nec [...] nec maio­rum error sequen­dus est, sed autho­ritas scripturarum, & Dei docentis Im­perium.. The Church may speake of it selfe, and vpon report of them whose Testimonie is humane and fallible: And it speaketh also vpon the authoritie of Gods word. In the first, it may erre and bee Maioranus. d. vero Dei cultu. l. 2. c. 28. Quid igitut agere debem' cum quispiam ex patri­bus nostris siue v­nus siue plures ali­quid asserrere com­perimus quod Ca­tholicae fidei non sit consentaneum? [...] illud con­temnendum est: vtique, &c. At quid de patribus illis, num & ipsi quo (que) repudiandi sunt? Nequaquam, sed in cae­teris omnibus amplectendi sunt & audiend. Etenim quamuis errarunt, errare tamen [...]. [...] in omnibus, neque semper errauerunt. Greg. Moral. l. 2. c. 41. Abulens. 2. Reg. c. 7. q. 6. deceiued, and consequently the Testimonie thereof absolutely bindeth not people to beleeue. But when it confirmeth her doctrine and Tradition by diuine Testimonie, the Tradition thereof, is the Tradition and voyce of God himselfe, worthy of all acceptation. Neither is her Testimonie fallible and doubtfull in this latter kinde, because of errour in the first, any E more than the Prophesie of Nathan was fallible, when he spake [Page 88] by inspiration to Dauid, 2. Sam. 7.5. Although when he former­ly A answered by a humane spirit, he was deceiued. Balaam is a credible witnesse in all those verities which God put into his mouth, Numb. 23.5, 18. & 24. 1. And yet in other matters which proceeded from himselfe, he was fallible. And Iosephus a Iew is credited in the Testimonie which hee gaue of Christ, Antiq. lib. 18. c. 4 [...], &c.. although in many other reports he was de­ceiued. The antient Fathers, Iustin Martyr, Ireneus, Origen, S t. Cyprian, erred in some things Francisc. Picus. Theorem. 23. Multi erroribus de mille annis, & de itera­tione Baptismi, &c. Maculati, beatitu­dine sunt donati, & ab Ecclesia celebra­ti: vti Papias, Cy­prianus, Victorinus, Ireneus, &c., and yet their authoritie in other matters, which they deliuered consonantly to holy Scripture, is credible. Our Aduersaries confesse, that their B Popes may erre personally, and that their Popes and Councels may erre in the Premises and Arguments Canus loc. l. 6. c. 8. Stapl. princip. Doct. l. 8. c. 15. & Relect. c. 4. q. 2. p. 467. & 469. [...]. Tena. Isagog. script. difficul. 1. sect. 4. [...]. C Introduct. Theol. l. 5. c. 7. p. 598., from which they deduce conclusions of Faith, and yet they will haue their defi­nitiue sentences to be of infallible authoritie. Cardinall Ia­cobatius [...]. d. Concil. l. 5. ar. 10. p. 293. Etsi possit errare, non sequitur [...] prop­teria possit recusari, vt suspectum: vt in simili [...] in matrimonio. in ca. Tenor, & ca. Lator. & ca. consanguinei. d. re iudic. cùm simil., speaking in the Popes defence, saith; That it follow­eth not, because one hath erred, that therefore his testimonie is altoge­ther inualid, and to be refused: And hee confirmeth this assertion by diuers Texts of the Canon Law.

IESVIT.

And whereas some Protestants affirme that the Church cannot erre in fundamentall points, but onely in things of lesse moment. The truth is, that in her perpetuall Tradi­tions, D. Feeld 4. Booke of the Church, ca. 3. and others. she cannot erre at all. If the Tradition of the Church D deliuering a small thing, as receiued from the Apostles, may be false, one may call into question her Traditions of moment, especially if he please to thinke them not to be of moment for like as if we admit in the Scriptures errours in small mat­ters, wee cannot be sure of its infallibitie in substantiall A proofe that the perpetuall Tradi­tion of the true Church cannot be false in any the least point of faith. See S. Aug. ep. 19. ad Hieronimum. matters. So likewise, if we grant Tradition perpetuall to be false in things of lesse importance, we haue no solid ground to defend her Traditions, as assured in other of moment: wherefore as he that should say, That Gods written word E is false in some lesser matters; as when it sayes, That S. Paul left his cloake at Troas, erreth fundamentally, by rea­son of the consequence, which giueth occasion to doubt of [Page 89] the truth of euery thing in Scripture: Euen so hee that A granteth that some part of Traditions, or of the word of God vnwritten, may bee false, erreth substantially; be­cause he giueth cause to doubt of any Tradition; which yet, as I haue shewed, is the prime originall ground of Faith, more fundamentall than the verie Scripture, which is not knowne to be Apostolicall but by Tradition: whereas a per­petuall Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by its owne light. For what more euident than that, that is B from the Apostles, which is deliuered as Apostolicall, by per­petuall succession of Bishops, consenting therein.

ANSWER.

The true Church in her sounder members, erreth not in points fundamentall, nor yet in matters of lesse moment, ma­liciously, or with pertinacie Occham. Dial. p. 1. l. 5. c. 28. In Ec­clesia militante est C certum iuditium quantum ad ea quae necesse est credere explicite ad salutem aeternam consequendam, quia sem­per vsque ad finem mundi erunt aliqui Catholici qui tali modo in vera [...] explicite permanebunt.: But the same may be ignorant, and also erre in secondarie Articles Sed circa illa quae non sunt necessaria explicite credere non est necesse quod semper in Ecclesia Catholica sit tale iudicium, quìa multa sunt de quibus melius est pie dubitare, quam vnam partem contradictionis vel [...] temere affirmare. Nequaquam tamen circa quae cun (que) talia, Catholici omnes aut pertinaciter errabunt aut pertinaciter dubitabunt, &c. pa. 497. Idem pa. 1. l. 2. c. 4. Error qui pertinaciam non habet, non obuiat sanctitati. [...]. summ. d. Eccl. l. 2. c. 112. Quamuis Ecclesia dono & authoritate diuina fulciatur, tamen in quantum est hominum congregatio aliquid ex defectu humano in actibus suis prouenit, quod non est diuinum. Lombard. l. 4. dist. 18. f. Ita & hic aperte ostenditur, quod non semper sequitur Deus, Ecclesiae iudicium, quae per [...] & ignorantiam interdum iudicat. Francisc. Picus. Theorem. 23. Fieri potest, vt vicarium caput aegrotet, quemad. & naturale, & sicut hoc noxios humores, ita illud praua dogmata, immittat in corpus..

The reason of the first is, because the same should then cease D to bee the true Church, by corrupting the substance of right faith, expresly or vertually; and consequently, there should re­maine no true Church vpon earth, which is impossible.

The reason of the second is, because the Church, since the Apostles, is not guided by immediate inspiration, or by Pro­pheticall reuelation, but by an ordinarie assistance of grace, ac­companying the vse of right meanes, which remooueth not possibilitie of errour, but leaueth space for humane iudgement, being regenerate onely in part, Heb. 5.2. Gal. 5.17. Aug. Enchir. c. 63. to worke by his proper force and power.

Secondly, the Church hath no perpetuall Traditions, but E such as are either contained in holy Scripture [...]. [...]. 74. [...] Traditio, &c. Si in Euangclio precipitur aut in Apostolorum Epistolis, aut actibus continetur, &c. obseruetur diuina haec & sancta [...]. Idem. serm. d. [...]. Christiana religio inuenit [...] Scriptura, [...] doctrinarum regulas emanasse, & hic nasci & [...], quic quid Ecclesiastica [...] disciplina., or which are [Page 90] subseruient to maintaine the faith, veritie, and authoritie of the A holy Scriptures, and the doctrine thereof.

Thirdly, whereas the Iesuit saith: That euen as no vntruth can be admitted in the holy Scripture, in regard of such things as are of the least moment, without ouerthrowing the totall authoritie thereof: so likewise no errour, great or small, can bee admitted in the doctrine and Tradition of the present Church, because vpon the same will follow the subuersion of all her Tradition, euen in matters essentiall.

I answere: That there is not the same reason of the Scrip­ture and the Church, for the Scripture is totally and perfectly diuine, and must alwayes bee so esteemed; and to admit any B errour or possibilitie thereof in Scripture, were to make God a lyar, and consequently, to ouerthrow all faith Aug. d. Doctr. Christiana lib. 1. ca. 37. Titubabit auté fides si Scripturarú vaccillat authoritas [...]. in Math. hom. 1.. But the pre­sent Church is onely the seruant of God, and of his word Chrys. d. La­zaro. hom. 4. Etiam fi mortuus reniuis­cat, etiam si Ange­lus de Coelo descé­dat maxime omni­um credendum est Scripturis, nam Angelorum herus, mortuorum paritèr ac viuentium Dominus ipse eas con­di dit., Iohn 10.27. and hath no credit or authoritie but from it, and al­though the same may erre in some things, yet there remaineth alwaies a higher and more soueraigne Iudge Aug. c. Faust. Manich. li. 11. ca. 5. Tanquam in sede quadam sublimitur constituta est, cui [...] omnis fidelis & pius intellectus., to wit, the holy Ghost speaking in and by the Scriptures, to whom Christians, desirous of truth, may appeale Aug. in Psalm. 22. Optatus Mileuitanus c. Parmen. li. 5. De Coelo, quaerendus est Iudex, & qui in tumulo quiescit tacitis tabulis loquitur viuus, voluntas eius velut in testamen­to sic inquiratur., and by whose sentence the Doctrine and Traditions of the present Church are to bee iudged. C

Whosoeuer admitteth any errour or vntruth in the holy Scripture, taketh away all authoritie from that which is the prime foundation of supernaturall veritie Aug. d Trinit. lib. 3. ca. 11. Nec re­licto solidaméto di­uini eloquij &c.. But he that admit­teth error or fallibilitie of iudgement in some Traditions and Doctrines of the Pastours of the present Church, doth onely D make the credit of a secondarie and inferior witnesse, subiect to triall and examination of an higher Iudge. And euen as in buil­ding the rule and measure of proportion must alwaies be euen and right in it selfe, but the workemans hand may possibly leane or shake, and applie his rule amisse: so likewise the holy Scriptures which are the principles of Theologie Cameracensis 1. Sent. q. 1. Art. 1. Principia Theolo­gica sunt ipsae sacri Canonis veritates, quoniam ad ipsas fit vltimata resolu­tio [...], & ex eis [...] singulae propositiones, Theologiae deducuntur., and the most exact ballance and measure of diuine Veritie (as S. Chrysostome speaketh Chrys. 2. Cor. hom. 13. [...]. Aug. c. Don. lib. 2. ca. 6. Afferamus diuinam stateram de Scripturis sanctis. [...] serm. d. Bapt. Christiana religio inuenit ex hac Scriptura, omnium Doctrina­rum regulas emanasse, & hic nasci, & huc [...] quicquid Ecclesiastica continet disciplina.) must be free from all obliquitie of error, and to ad­mit the least error in the Scripture ouerthroweth the founda­tion of Faith. But the Ministerie and Tradition of the Church E [Page 91] is like an Artificers hand, which may sometimes leane and goe A awrie, and yet the foundation of Veritie abideth firme in the prime authenticall rule, and by the same, the errour of mens Tradition and Doctrine may be corrected.

Fourthly the Iesuit affirmeth, That Tradition (to wit, of the Church since the Apostles) is the prime originall ground of Faith, more fundamentall than the Scripture. This assertion is Antichri­stian and impudent Hieron. sup. Aggeum. c. 1. Quae absque authoritate & testimonio scrip­turarum quasi Tra­ditione Apostolica sponte reperiút at­què confingunt, percutit gladi Dei., for can any thing be more fundamentall than the foundation Bassolis, praef. Prolog. sup. Sent. Quartum principa­le. De primo nota quod fundamenta eius in montibus sanctis. Fundamen­tum enìm Scriptu­rae sacrae, Christus est, petra solidissi­ma supra quā fun­data est veritas Scripturae., or of greater authoritie than the word of God? S. Peter speaking of the Propheticall Scriptures, equalleth the same to the sensible voice of God, which was B vttered in the Apostles audience from heauen, Math. 3.17. & c. 17.5. saying, [...], We haue the most sure word of Prophesie, &c. vpon these words S. Augustine d. verb. Apostoli, serm. 29. commenteth as followeth: Et cum dixisset hanc vocem audiuimus de Coelo delatam, subiunxit atque ait, habemus certiorem propheticum sermonem, sonuit illa vox de Coelo, certior est propheticus sermo, when the Apostle had said, We heard this voice from heauen; he addeth further, and saith, We haue a more sure word of prophesie. That voice sounded from heauen; and yet the propheticall word is more sure: he C said more sure, not better or truer, because that word from heauen was as good and as profitable as the word of prophe­sie; Why therefore more sure? Because the hearer was more confirmed by it Certioré sane dixit certiorem nō meliorem non ve­riorem. Tam enim verus ille sermo de Coelo, quam sermo Propheticus, tàm bonus tàm vtilis. Quid est ergo certiorem, nisi in quo magis confirmetur Auditor..

Our Sauiour himselfe in the Gospell examineth the Tradi­tions of the Pharises, and of the Iewish Church then being, by the Scriptures, Math. 5.6. and 7. & Ch. 12.5. & c. 15.4. & D 19.4. And the holy Ghost in the new Testament, both in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, confirmeth the Truth which was taught, by the authoritie of the Scriptures, and Christ Iesus perpetually submitteth himselfe and his doctrine to the triall of the Scriptures, and the Apostles after him did the like, Acts 26.22. The antient Fathers affirme, that the Scriptures are of most eminent authoritie Aug. d. [...]. Dei, li. 11. c. 3. & lib. 14. ca. 7., and that wee are aboue all things to giue credit to them Chrys. d. Laza­ro Hom. 4., and that they are the mouth of God Rupert in Mat. lib. 4. cap. 5. ver. 2. Quod est illud os Domini, nisi [...] per quas nobis loquitur [...], and the verie hand of God Chrys. Hom. d. Expuls. ipsius. Lego manum cius, &c. Aug. [...]. 144. Quoddam Chyrographum Dei quod omines transeuntes legerent & viam promissio­nis [...] tenerent., and Paul, and Peter, and Iohn, and the whole companie of the Prophets E do speake with vs by them Chrys. in Rom. hom. 30., and that Faith it selfe, by which [Page 92] a iust man liueth, is conceiued by them Aug. d. Ciuit-Dei li. 19. ca. 18., and the Church it A selfe is demonstrated (to wit, tanquam à priori) by them Idem ep. 50. & d. vnit. Eccles. c. 3.. But on the contrarie, Traditions receiue their authoritie from the Scriptures, and may not be admitted vnlesse they agree with the Scriptures: And in our Aduersaries Tenet, men must first beleeue the authoritie of the Church before they can receiue or beleeue Tradition: from all which it followeth, that Tradi­tion of the present Church is neither the prime originall ground of Faith, nor yet more fundamentall, concerning Faith, than the Scripture.

The Trident Councell held it sufficient to equall Tradition B with the Scriptures. This new master with Baronius Annal. tom. 1. Anno. 53. n. 11. & Pighius Pighius con­crouers. 3. preferreth them before the Scriptures. These men perceiue that the Roman Faith cannot subsist, vnlesse they depresse the written word of God, and exalt the prophane, bastardly, and Apocriphall Traditions of the Pope. They say the Scripture is a breathlesse lumpe Coster. Enchi­rid. loc. d. Pontif. pa. 135. a nose of wax Pigh. contro­uers. 3. pa. 92. Idem Hierarch. Epistol. Nuncupator. [...]. disp. 2. d. fid. pag. 21. Ipsae Scripturae quoad bonam par­tem, difficiles sunt, obscurae & ambi­guae, inflar nasi ce­rei, & regulae lesbiae, susque deque tra­hi possunt ab im­pijs., a leaden rule Andrad. de­fens. lib. 2. pag. 257. Neque in libris ip­sis quib' sacra my­steria cōscripta sút, quicquam inest di­uinitatis, quae nos ad credendum quae illis continentur, re­ligiono aliqua constringat, &c. Bannes 22. q. 1. ar. 10. pag. 181. Cum sitelinguis & mortua, seipsam [...] non valet.. Andradius wri­teth, That in the Books of the Scriptures themselues, there is no diuini­tie or any thing else binding vs to beleeue Stapl. Princip. Doctr. lib. 12. ca. 2. pa. 444.. Stapleton saith, That being considered as written, it can no way be called the Temple or Tabernacle C of the holy Ghost Bos. d. Signis Eccles. tom. 2. lib. 16. ca. 10.. Bosius saith, The holy Ghost resideth in the Church more effectually and nobly than in the Bookes of the Scripture Ma­ioranus Clyp. lib. 2. cap. 28. Vnus Ecclesiae consensus qui nunquam caruit spiritu Deipluris apud nos esse debet, quā omnes elingues, & muti codices, & quotquot fuerunt sunt & erunt, vnquam scripta volumina, quae homi­num ingenijs semper materiam contentionis prebuerunt.. And Majoranus hath these words, The consent of the Church alone which neuer wanted the spirit of God, ought to be of greater esteeme with vs, than all mute and tonguelesse Bookes, and than all the written volumes which are or euer were, and which haue in all ages ministred fuell of contention to the wits of men [...]. Def. [...]. d. verb. Dei, lib. 4. cap. 4. & cap. 12. Putasnè plures haereses & sectas exorituras fuisse, si nulla penitus Scriptura extitisset, quam E nunc cum Scriptura mortalibus è Coelo data est? Ego certe propior sum existimanti, pauciores, [...] futu­ras.. And Gretsar the Iesuit, There would haue beene fewer contentions in the world (as I supose) if there had beene no Scripture at all. Iacob Brower a Reader of Do­way Clauis, Apostolica ar. 8. Nomine Ecclesiae aptè intelligi potest, ipse vniuersalis Ecclesiae pastor, &c. atquè adeo dictum Augustini est, Idem ac si diceret Euangelio non crederem, nisi me [...] quinti aut alterius Pontificis moueret authoritas. saith, I would not beleeue the Gospell, did not the authoritie of Pope Paul the fift mooue me. And lastly it is one of the dictates of D Pope Hildebrand, canonised by Baronius Baron. Annal. tom. 11. Anno 1076. n. 33. Quod [...] capitulum nullus­què liber [...] habeatur, absquè illius authoritate., That no Chapter or Booke of Scripture must bee esteemed canonicall without his au­thoritie.

I doubt not but that Romists are able with faire glosses and [Page 93] distinctions to salue these blasphemies [...] Animaduers. c. Par. Disp. 1. c. 2. Thes. 7. pag. 12., and to reconcile dark A nesse with light, but he that diggeth a pit for people to fall in­to (althought he couer the same with some superficiall tecture) is accused by the antient sentence of diuine Law. Exod. 21.33.

Towards the end of this Section, the Iesuit addeth,

First, That the Scripture is not knowne to bee Apostolicall but by Tradition. This is false, for the Scripture is knowne to come from the Apostles, by inward grounds and testimonies contai­ned in it selfe, and by the vertue and effects of it, as well as by the Tradition of the Church.

Secondly, it is most vntrue, that Tradition is knowne to come B from the Apostles by it owne light, but not Scripture: for what internall light hath Tradition more than, or aboue the Scrip­ture? If it haue, then the articles of Popish Tradition, Purga­torie, adoration of Images, &c. are more manifest than the ar­ticles which Scripture teacheth concerning the incarnation and resurrection of Christ, than Heauen and Hell, &c. Also sa­cred Scripture is receiued as diuine by all Christians, Popish Tradition onely by some. The Catalogue of Romish Tra­dition could neuer to this day be specified, and distinctly as­signed [...]. Lo. com. d. Script. n. 66. Nec dum Pontificij integram farraginē Traditionum suarū enumerare vel po­tuerunt vel volue­runt (qua de re Colloq. Ratisbon) verùm quasi communem hanc topicam solum seruant, vt quicquid ex Scriptura probare non possunt, ex Tradi­tione ortum esse dicant., but the Canon of holy Scripture may. Moreouer, C holie Scripture hath the perpetuall and vnanimous consent of the Primitiue Church, Popish Tradition hath not. Againe, Bel­larmine confesseth Bellarm. d. verb. Dei, li. 1. ca. 2. At [...] is Scripturis quae Propheticis & [...] literis continentur, nihil est notius, nihil est certius., that nothing is better knowne, and more certaine than holy Scripture: but if nothing be better known, then nothing hath clearer light.

Thirdly, the confirmation of the former (to wit, What more D euident, &c.) is insufficient, because that which is known to come from the Apostles by their owne immediat testimonie in wri­ting, is more euidently knowne to come from them, than that which is affirmed to come from them, onely by the report of men which are deceiueable. Diuine testimonie maketh things more certaine and infallible than humane. The testimonie of the Apostles extant in writing is totally diuine, the report of Bishops is in part humane Lombard. sent. lib. 4. d. 18. F. Non sempèr Deus sequitur Ecclesiae iudicium, quae per surreptionem & ignorantiam interdum iudicat, Deus autèm semper iudicat secundùm veritatem. Panormitan in Decret. 5. d. sent. Excom. c. 28. Iudicium Ecclesiae aliquan­dò E [...] opinionem, quae saepè fallit & fallitur. Veritas quandoquè later Ecclesiam..

IESVIT. A

And this may bee clearely prooued, to omit other preg­nant testimonies, by the words of our Sauiour in the last of Matthew: Going into the whole world, teaching all nations, baptizing them, In the Name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost: teaching them to keepe all that I haue commanded you all dayes, euen to the con­summation of the world. A promise of wonderfull comfort B vnto them that pawne their soules and saluation vpon Gods word, deliuered by perpetuall Tradition. For in this sentence, appeare these fixe things: First, That there is still a Christian Church all dayes, not wanting in the world, so much as one day, till the consummation of the world.

ANSWER.

The place of Saint Matthew, chapter 28. 19, 20. prooueth: C First, that the holy Apostles receiued a Commission and Man­date from Christ, to preach the Gospell to all nations, both Iewes and Gentiles, and to baptise them, In the name of the Fa­ther, Sonne, and holy Ghost. Marke 16. 15, 16. Luke 24.27. Acts 1.8. Rom. 1.14.

Secondly, that our Sauiour promised his Apostles a perpe­tuall Gratia gratis data. Gratia gratum fa­ciens. Aquin. 1.2. q. 111. ar. 1. Cum gratia D ad hoc ordinetur vt homo reducatur in Deum, ordine quodam hoc agitur, vt scilicet quidam per alios in Deum reducantur. Secundum hoc igitur duplex eft gratia: vna quidem per quam ipse homo Deo coniungitur, quae vo­catur gratia gratum faciens. àlia vero per quam vnus homo cooperatur alteri, ad hoc quod ad Deum reducatur: hoc autem donum vocatur gratia gratisdata. presence, and assistance of his diuine power and grace, both in regard of the gifts of edification, Acts 2. 4. And in respect of the grace of inward sanctification, Iohn 17.17.

Thirdly, because the Apostles were mortall, and not to re­maine alwayes personally vpon earth, and other Pastors Aug. Ep. 80. & in Psal. 56. [...]. Math. c. 28. must succeed in the office of Ministerie, the promise of Christ tou­ching his spirituall presence, and assistance of grace, is extended to these successours, and when they teach and baptise in such manner as Christ commanded, diuine grace is present to their E Ministeriall actions Leo Epist. 69. Ego vobiscum sum vsque ad consum­mationē seculi: vt si quid perseruitutem, nostram, bono ordine & gratulanti impletur affectu, non ambigamus per Spiritum sanctum [...] donatum., and the holy Ghost co-worketh with them.

[Page 95] Fourthly, But yet succeeding Pastors receiued not the A same measure of diuine Grace with the Apostles [...]. cp. 19. [...]. in Ps. 86. Fundamenta [...] in montibus fan­ctis. Quos nos di­cere [...] fun­damenta? Aposto­los, in [...] erant fundamenta, &c. [...] quia [...], [...] fun­damento alius au­rum alius argentum, &c. Diligit Dominus Portas Syon super omnia Tabernacula, &c.: neyther had they immediate and Propheticall reuelation, but onely a measure of Grace, ordinarie, mediate, and in some sort con­ditionall. Also, the said Promise, Matth. 28. 20. was com­mon and equall to all the Apostles, and to the successors of one Apostle, as well as of another: to the successors of Saint Iames, and Saint Iohn, &c. as well as to the successors of Saint Peter Orig. in [...]. B tr. 1. Quod si super vnum illum Petrum tantum existimas [...] totam Ecclesiam, quid [...] es de [...], & Apostolorum vnoquoque? Alioqui num audebimus dicere, quod aduersus [...] non prae­ualiturae sint portae inferorum, aduersus caeteros autem Apostolos & praesectos [...] sint, ac non potius, in omnibus, & singulis corum, &c..

Fifthly, Notwithstanding the said promise, Bishops and Pastors succeeding the Apostles, were in respect of them­selues subiect to errors Hieron. in Psal. 86. Et principum, hoc est Apostolo­rum & Euangeli­starum horum qui fuerunt, in ea, vi­dete quid dicat, Qui fuerunt, non qui sunt, vt excep­tis Apostolis quod­cunque aliud po­steal [...], ab­scindatur, non ha­beat postea autho­ritatem. Quamuis ergo [...] sit ali­quis post Aposto­los, quamuis diser­tus non. [...] au­thoritatem, Quo­niam Domin' nar­rat in Scriptura po­pulorum, & Prin­cipum qui fuerunt in ca., and their iudgement in matters of Faith was not absolutely infallible, like the Apostles; but so farre forth onely, as they walked in the footsteps, and fol­lowed the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles. Our Sauiour C promised, that he would be alwayes with the Apostles, euen to the consummation of the World; partly, in their personall Teaching, whiles they themselues liued in the World; and partly, in their permanent Doctrine, contained in the Scrip­tures of the New Testament Cyril. in Esaiam, lib. 2. c. 12. [...] scripta [...] (Apost.) nos [...], ac [...] & constantia fidei, & [...], pag. 103., when the same was truly deli­uered by their successors. And he will be also with succee­ding Pastors all Ages, according to such a measure of Grace and assistance, as is sufficient for the edifying of the Church, if they for their owne part Cordub. Arm. Fid. Quaest. 2. Prop. 9. Promissiones Dei generales, de co [...] ipse non solus, sed [...] & cum [...] nostris concurrendo in nobis facturus est, sub hac condi­tione sunt intelligendae, si videlicet homo faciat quod in se est, ad talem finem & effectum. be studious to learne diuine Truth from the holy Apostles, and carefull to preach the same to D others: But his promise concerning immunitie from error, and mortall offences, is not so absolute to successors, as it was to the Apostles themselues.

Sixtly, Many antient Expositors affirme, That the Promise E of Christ, Matth. 28.20. is especially made to the iust and faith­full Leo. serm. 2. c. 3. d. Resurrect. Chrys. Matth. Hom. 91. Hieron. sup. Matth. 28. Basil. Hom. 29.; and some of them say, to the Elect Druthmar. Matth. 28. Est etiam cum Reprob is [...], &c. Sed aliter est cum [...], &c. Paschas. [...]. in Matth. 28. Se cum suis elecus in [...]. onely. And Oc­cham [Page 96] affirmeth, That if there should be found in the whole World A but one Orthodox Bishop, or but one such Priest [...], Dial. p. 1. lib. 5. c. 31., and a small num­ber of Lay people Id. lib. 2. c. 25. & lib. 4. c. 9. & lib. 5. c. 3. Non est neces­sarium credere im­plicite nec expli­cite, multitudinem Christianorum non errare nec errasse in fide, nec maiorem partem: pro eo quod, fides Catholica in [...] potest seruari, pag. 451. Fides quam B. [...], praedicauir & docuit, nunquam deficiet, sed in aliquibus Chri­stianis Clericis vel Laicis, [...] vel mulieribus, vsque ad finem seculi perdurabit. 473. Quamuis maior pars, immo tota fere multitudo Cloricorum, possit contra fidem errare, & fidem Catholicam pertinaciter [...], tamen semper [...] saltim [...] Episcopus sacerdos Catholicus, qui illa quae ordinis sunt, licite valeat exercere. 502. Sicut in Idiotis (Sacerdotibus ac Religiosis & Magistratibus repudiatis) fidem primitus fundauit Catholi­cam: B Ita omnibus literatis & potentibus datis in reprobum sensum, potest dare [...] simplices illiteratos & rusticos, in aedificationem Ecclesiae Orthodoxae. 498., professing right Faith in Articles essentiall, and willing to embrace all other Diuine Vertie, when the same should be manifested vnto them, this were sufficient to make good, Christ his Promise. Matth. 28.20.

In the next passage, our Aduersarie inferreth and deri­ueth certaine Propositions from the former Text of Matth. 28. 20.

First hee saith, There is still a Christian Church all dayes, not wanting so much as one day in the World, till the consummation thereof.

I answer, That there is still in the World a common Chri­stian C Church, wherein some beleeuers hold the substance of right Faith: But there is not perpetually in the World a Church, the more potent and maior part whereof beleeueth and professeth right Faith, without error, in all points, and so infallible in all her Doctrine, as was the Primitiue Church Kling. Loc. Com. lib. 3. cap. 32. Apud viros bonos & aequos maioris authoritatis est iu­dicium illorum Scripturae qui sanctis illis Apostolis ac Martyribus viciniores [...], quorum vita & affectio erat purior & multo sanctior, quam huius populi nunc superstitis, qui certe vix rationem [...] habet ad purum Vi­num D si cum priori illo conferatur., which enioyed the immediate and actuall preaching of the Apostles.

IESVIT.

Secondly, This Church is euer visible and conspicuous: For the Church which alwayes teacheth and christeneth all Nations, to which Christ saith, I am alwayes with you, not with you sitting in corners, or hidden vnder ground, but with you, exercising the Office enioyned you in the words precedent, Docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos, E &c.

ANSWER.

The Church is euer visible, according to some degree of [Page 97] visibilitie: but this Scripture teacheth not, that the true A Church is alwayes largely and gloriously visible. The same doth not actually in euerie Age teach and christen all Nati­ons; and the Roman Church for sundrie Ages past, teacheth and christeneth few or none within Natolia, and other large Prouinces, liuing in subiection to the Grand Seignior, or Em­perour of Constantinople. And as Christ doth not say ver­bally in this Text, I am alwayes with you, sitting in corners, so he doth not say, I am alwayes with you, when you are carryed vpon mens shoulders, and tread vpon Emperours neckes, and diuide and share the Kingdomes of the World, and gather B endlesse Riches, by selling Pardons, and preaching Pur­gatorie.

But yet of the two, it is farre more agreeable to the Diuine Goodnesse (who is a Father of the poore and oppressed) to be present to his little flocke in persecution, and when it flyeth as a Lambe from the Wolfe, and hideth it selfe from the Op­pressor, Apoc. 12. 14, than that hee hath entayled his perpe­tuall presence vpon ambitious and oppressing Tyrants, which stiled themselues Pastors, and were rauening Wolues, Scribes and Pharisees, imposing insupportable burthens vpon others, C and not moouing them with one of their owne Ioh. Sarisbur. Policrat. lib. 6. ca. 24. Romana Ec­clesia quae mater omnium Ecclesia­rum est, se non tam matrem exhi­bet quam nouer­ram. Sedent in ea Scribae & Phara­saei, ponentes one­ra importabilia, in humeris hominum: quae digito non contingunt. Dominantur in Clero, nec forma sunt [...], &c. Con­cutiunt D Ecclesias, [...] excitant, collidunt Clericos, & popularium laboribus, & miserijs afflictorum nequa­quam compatiuntur: Ecclesiarum laetantur spolijs, & quaestum reputant pietatem, iustitiam, non tam veri­tate quam pretio redimunt. Nocent saepius & eo Daemonas imitantur, tunc prodesse putantur cum no­cere desistunt. Ipse Romanus Pontifex omnibus grauis & intolerabilis est. Iacob. Almain. Quaest. Vesp. Vtinam Zelus Domus Dei, nostri temporis Praelatos comederet, & Zelarent salutem Christi fidelium plus­quam pecuniam? Ibid. Cum caput ac si esset in destructionem, sibi potestas data, & non in aedificatio­nem, in eos qui salutem corpotis intendunt saeuire videatur, & pro eo quod bene arguunt plectere paena. Sext. Decretal. c. Fundamenta. Gloss. Roma fundata a praedonibus, adhuc de primordijs retinet, dicta Roma quasi rodens manus. Roma manus rodit, quod rodere non valet odit. Auentin. Annal. Boior. lib. 4. pag. 322. Faxit Deus Opt. Max. & meliorem mentem det Pontif. nostris, vti omisso luxu fastuque diuitem Princi­pem [...], sequi desinant, fallacissimi mundi huius caduca atque fragilia bona fastidiant. Christum pauperem [...], [...] bibere, & eius crucem humeris portare, tandem discant. Ita fiet, vt vulgo male vltra non audiant, atque castigentur, quod gregem Christianum populum Dei peculiarem E compilent, [...], [...], & tanquam escam [...] denorent, adeo vt tolerabilior miseris foret con­ditio sub Imperio Turcarum. fingers. And there is no cause, why the good God, which was pre­sent with Daniel in the Lyons Denne, and with Ionas in the Whales Belly, and with Ioseph in the Dungeon, and with Iob vpon the Dunghill, should in the dayes of the oppres­sing Antichrist, withdraw his presence and assistance from his poore flocke, yea, although it were sitting in corners, and hidden vnder ground.

IESVIT. A

Thirdly, This Church is euer Apostolicall: for to his Apostles Christ said, I am alwayes with you vntill the consummation of the World; not with you in your owne persons, but with you in your successors, in whom you shall continue to the Worlds end: Ergo, a lawfull companie of Bishops, Pastors, and Doctors, succeeding the B Apostles, must be perpetually in the World.

ANSVVER.

First, The Church may be called Apostolicall, because of Faith, Plantation, and Externall Ordination of Pastors.

According to Faith and Doctrine, in all the maine and sub­stantiall Articles, the true Church is euer Apostolicall.

In regard of Plantation, the Primitiue Church was Apo­stolicall, C because it was immediately planted and watered by the holy Apostles. But Tertullian affirmeth, That many par­ticular Tertullian. d. Prae­script. Ca. 32. Ad [...] pro­uocabuntur ab illis Ecclesijs, quae licet nullum ex Aposto­lis, vel Apostolicis authorem suum proferant, vt multo posteriores, quae denique quotidie instituuntur: tamen in [...] fide conspirantes, non minus Apostolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae. Churches were not thus planted by Apostles, or A­postolicall persons, and yet they were truly Apostolicall, by reason of consanguinitie of Doctrine with the holy Apostles.

According to the third manner, to wit, in respect of Exter­nall D Ordination, and Imposition of Hands, receiued from Bishops, lineally succeeding the Apostles, a false and corrupt Church may be Apostolicall (as I haue formerly prooued.) And it is not impossible for a true Church to succeed or come out of a false, or for a corrupt Church to reforme it selfe. And if this happen, there is required no new Ordination of Pastors, [...] any Miracles, to confirme their Vocation; but they which [...] ordained in a corrupt Church, returning to the right Faith and worship of God, make their former Ordination more legitimate, holy, and effectuall. E

The Iesuit in the words ensuing, collecteth from our Saui­ours promise, I will be with you, &c. that there must euer bee a companie of Bishops and Pastours, succeeding the Apostles, because Christ said to them and their successours, I will bee with [Page 99] you, &c. But if this collection be good, then euerie one of the A Apostles must haue Bishops, Pastours, and Doctours, succee­ding them in right faith, to the end of the world, for Christ spake to them all in generall, and also distributiuely to euerie of them, &c. But the Papals themselues at this day, exclude all the successours of other Apostles, excepting Saint Peter. Nei­ther yet doth our Sauiour limit his presence and assistance to generall Councels, or definitiue sentences of Popes, but hee speaketh of Preaching and Baptising: and therefore if his pre­sence with Pastours and Bishops, doe free them from all errour, it must free them in Preaching and writing Bookes, as well as B sitting in Councell. Also they to whom Christ is alwayes pre­sent, are not of infallible iudgement, or free from errour in all matters, but onely from damnable and malicious errour, as ap­peareth by Saint Cyprian, Saint Augustine, and all the elect of God.

Wherefore this promise, in regard of the perfection there­of, did appertaine to the Apostles themselues: and in regard of the veritie of it, and for such a measure of assistance as is neces­sarie to constitute a number of faithfull people, more or lesse, in euery age to serue Christ truely, in the substance of faith C and pietie, it is fulfilled alwayes, euen to the end of the world.

But because our Aduersaries insist so much vpon this Text, to raise their visible and personall succession; I will reduce the Argument which they draw out of it, into forme, and then accommodate mine Answere.

If Christ will be with his Apostles all dayes, to the end of the world, then the Apostles, not continuing aliue themselues, they must remaine in Bishops, Pastours, and Doctours, locally and per­sonally D succeeding them to the end of the world. But the first is true. Ergo, &c.

First, if the consequence of this Argument were good, then all and euerie one of the Apostles must continue allwayes, to the consummation of the world, in Bishops, Pastours, and Doctours, lineally succeeding them, which Papals themselues denie [...]. d. Ec­clesia l. 4. c. 8. Om­nes Ecclesiae Patriarchales, habuerunt per longa tempora Episcopos manifeste Haereticos, & proindè interupta E est [...] successio. [...]. Princip. Doctr. l. 4. c. 18..

Secondly, lineall and personall succession, is not the sole meanes, by which the Apostles, after their decease, remaine in the world; but they remaine also in the world by their Scrip­tures, [Page 100] and also by the faith of Beleeuers, receiuing and obeying A their doctrine [...]. Com. Math. 28.20. Ex hoc intelligitur quod vsque ad finem seculi, non sunt [...] in mundo qui diuina mansione & in habitatione sunt digni. Chrys. in Math. [...]. [...]. De functi quoque multum valent prodesse hijs, qui eorum imperio paruerint. Bell. d. [...]. Beat. li. 1. c. 6. B. Paulus adhuc bene operatur, exemplo & Scriptis..

Thirdly, that which is promised vpon condition, is not ab­solute, vntill the condition be fulfilled. The presence of Christ is promised to the Apostles successours conditionally, Orig. in Math. Hom. 1. Quoniam qui Episcoporum locum sibi vendi­cant vtuntur eo di­cto sicut Petrus, & Claues regni caelo­rum à saluatore ac­ceperunt, docent (que) ea, quae ab illis li­gata fuerint, hoc est cōdemnata ea­dem, & in caelis ligata, rurfus ea quae soluta fuerint ab ipsis, eadem & in caelis esse soluta, dicendum est illos rectè loqui, si pariter & facta habuerint ob quae dictum est illi qui erat Petrus, tu es Petrus: sique tales fuerint, vt à Christo super eos aedificetur Ecclesia, & ad eos illud iure referri possit. Nichol. Clemang. Disp. [...]. mater. Concil. General. Illis adest spiritus, illos dirigit, atque ad finem ducit salutarem, qui dignum in se hospitium illi paraue­runt, seque eius aspiratione arque visitatione (quantum in eis erat) per bona opera dignos fecerunt. Illos au­tem quomodo audiat, aut vifiter aut illustrer, qui sibi aduersantur, illumque cum in se non possident, in alijs extin­guere C nituntur, qui pro igne charitatis, ardore sunt ambitionis inflammati. and as they were one with the Apostles by imitation, and subordina­tion: that is, so farre as they walked in their steps, and confor­med their Doctrine and Ministerie to the patterne receiued B from them. But successours did not alwayes performe this condition: neither did the promise inable them to doe it, with­out their owne care and indeuour, which was contingent and separable, and therefore many times deficient.

Fourthly, Christs presence alwayes to the consummation of the world, with some Bishops, Pastours, and Doctours, li­neally succeeding the Apostles, prooueth not that these Bi­shops and Pastours, cannot erre in any part of their Doctrine; for then no particular Bishops, hauing Apostolicall ordination, could fall into any errour: but it sheweth onely, that Christ co-operates with them, in such Ministeriall duties and acti­ons as they performe according to his Ordinance: And when D they preach his Doctrine, and administer his Sacraments, hee himselfe will adde vertue and grace to their actions, being duly performed Greg. [...]. Catech. cap. 33. In spirituali modo regenerationis promisit se ad futurum his quae facta sunt, & imprimit operi [...] suam, volun­tate nostra accedente ad id quod intenditur. Atque id quod dixit Christus, inprimis videtur referendum esse, ad [...] suam in [...] & [...] operibus, in quibus quod cernitur corruptibile est, quod latet [...]..

IESVIT.

Fourthly, this Church is vniuersall, [...] in mun­dum E vniuersum, Marc. 16. 15. where I will be alwayes with you.

ANSWER. A

The true Church is vniuersall, according to the manner for­merly declared. But the Argument taken out of Saint Marke 16.15. prooueth not, that it is euer actually vniuersall, in re­spect of place, and multitude of professours. For as it follow­eth not, that because Christ said he would be with Saint Paul when he preached at Corinth, ( Act. 18.10.) therefore he will be euer at Corinth: So likewise it is inconsequent to inferre, Christ said he would be present in all places of the world with the Apostles, when they baptised and preached as he comman­ded B them: Ergo, he will alwayes be present in those places, al­though their successours neglect his commandement. Is God euer in the dungeon in Egypt, because he was euer there, whilst Ioseph, a iust person, continued in prison. The promise of spi­rituall presence, is annexed to the worke of Preaching and Bap­tising, wheresoeuer it is performed, according to the Diuine Ordinance: but that which in some ages, hath beene done in many places, may at other times be performed in few.

IESVIT. C

Fiftly, the Church is one, not diuided into parts, because it teacheth and beleeueth vniformely, all that Christ deliuered and commanded, without factions, Sects or parts, about matters of faith.

ANSWER.

It is not affirmed, neither can it be concluded out of Mat. 28. that the visible Church in all ages of the world, teacheth and beleeueth, either vniformely, Cusan. Concord. Cath. l. 1. c. 5. Licet fides vna sit funi­culus [...], tamen aliquando varietas opinionū absque pertinacia, stat, cum vnitate. or expresly and distinctly, all D that Christ deliuered or commanded: and in the same Chur­ches which were planted by the Apostles, there was discord, among infirme Christians, 1. Cor. 1.11.

IESVIT.

Sixtly, this Church is alwayes holy for doctrine, neuer de­liuering or teaching any falshood: I who am the truth, am alwayes with you, teaching all nations. Holy also for life, Christ the Holy of Holies, assisting and making her able to E conuert Infidels, which it could not well doe, without signes and tokens of wonderfull sanctitie, at the least, in her more eminent Preachers.

ANSVVER. A

Although the true Church is alwaies holy for Doctrine, yet it is not perfectly and in the highest degree euer so [...]. Relect. c. 1. quaest. 4. ar. 5. notab. 1. Est quo (que) & vocatur interdū vera Ecclesia prop­ter ipsam doctrinae perfectissimam pu­ritatem & Sacra­mentorū vsum re­ligiosissimum. Quae sanè perfectio non est omnium tem­porum & locorum: quia & iuxtà Ca­tholicum intellectū de quibusdam do­ctrinae partibus du­bitari interdùm po­test, & a magnis vi­ris erratum est, ma­nente etiàm penes tales vera Ecclesia.. And it is most inconsequent to argue, Christ which is the Truth is euer with the Church, Ergo the Church cannot erre or teach any falshood, for Christ is alwaies with the faithfull, Ephes. 3. 17. yet iust and faithfull people may erre. Because Christ was with the Apostles by miraculous inspiration, therefore they could not erre, or deliuer any falshood great or small, but he is present with the sounder part of the Church militant since B the Apostles by ordinarie grace and assistance, which freeth the same from damnable and malicious errour, but not from all er­rour. And this assistance of Grace is greater or lesse, according to the good pleasure of Christ, and the disposition of his people Chrys. Serm. 20. sup. Rom. Tametsi enim gratia sit & ipsa, non tamen simplicitèr ef­funditur sed mensuram à recipientibus se accipiens, [...] quantum inuenerit sibi oblatum fidei C vasculum., which are compassed about with ignorance and in­firmitie, and at some times better or worse qualified than at other.

Also the true Church, in firmissimis suis, in her firmest mem­bers, is [...] holy for life, because the Holy of Holiest sancti­fieth and purgeth the same by his Word, Sacraments, and Grace, Eph. 5.26. Tit. 3.5, 6. But it is not absolute in holinesse, Iam. 3.2. 1. Ioh. 1.8. Bernard. in Psalm. Qui. hab. Serm. 10. Nisi esset hic, quaedam vt ita [...] &c. nor yet in euery age so remarkeably ho­ly, that it is thereby able to conuert Infidels [...] sunt Christiani &c. Maior continentia inuenitur apud il­los qui sūt in Schis­mate. Id. 1. Cor. ho. 36. Cyprian. d. Laps. n. [...]. [...]. d. [...]. Dei lib. 3. Ipsa Dei Ecclesia quae in omnibus debet esse placatrix Dei, quid est aliud, [...] quid est aliud pene omnis coetus [...], quam sentina vitiorum?. And the true Church hath not in all ages the gift of Miracles Chrys. Imp. Math. Hom. 49. Nunc autem E signorum operatio [...] sunt Christiani. Greg. Mor. lib. 34. ca. 3. A sancta Ecclesia [...]., and the pretext of Miracles is common to deceiuers, Math. 24.24, 25. 2. Thessal. 2.9. Apoc. 13.13. And Suares Suar. Def. Fid. Cath. lib. 1. ca. 7. [...] cap. 44. [...] de authoritate [...] do­ctoris haeretici, illos [...] &c. quasi nec hoc scriptum sit, venturos multos, qui [...] virtutes maximas aederent, ad fallaciam muniendam corruptae praedicationis, &c. the Iesuit saith, D Haec adulterari possunt, & ita exterius fingi vt non sint necessaria signa verae Fidei, Miracles may so be adulterated and external­ly feigned, that they may not be necessarie signes of Faith. And Canus [...] loc. lib. 11. ca. 6. speaking of Popish miracles and legends, saith, Nostri pleriquè de industria, ita multa [...] vt eorum me pudeat & tae­deat, sundrie of our men do so wilfully coine many things (in their report of Miracles) that I am ashamed and irked of them.

IESVIT. A

That the Roman is the One, Holy, Catholicke, Apostolicall Church, from and by which we are to receiue the Tradition of Christian Doctrine.

These grounds being laid, it is apparant that the Ro­man Church (that is, the multitude of Christians spread ouer the world, cleauing to the Doctrine and Tradition of B the Church of Rome) is the One, Holy, Catholicke, and Apo­stolicall Church.

ANSVVER.

The former grounds (according to your deliuerie, and expo­sition of them) are partly false, and partly ambiguous and cap­tious, and therefore it cannot be made apparant from them, That the moderne Roman Church, is the One, Holy, Catholicke, and Apo­stolicall C Church, from which we are absolutely to receiue the whole Tradition of Christian Doctrine.

IESVITS 1. Argument.

There mnst be alwaies in the world One, Holy, Catho­licke, and Apostolicall Church, that is, a Church deliuering Doctrine vniformely, therby making them credible: Vni­uersally, thereby making them famously knowne to man­kind: Holily, so making them certain, and such as on them D we may securely rely: Apostolically, so making them perpe­tually flow without change vnto the present Christianitie in the Channell of neuer interrupted succession of Bishops from the Apostles. And this Church must either be the Ro­man, or the Protestants, or some other opposit to both. Pro­testants cannot say, a Church opposite to both, for then they should be condemned in their owne judgement, and bound to conforme themselues to that Church; which can be no E other but the Graecian, a Church holding as many or more Doctrines, which Protestants dislike, than doth the Church of Rome, as J can demonstrate if need be.

ANSVVER. A

There must be alwaies in the world a Church, One, Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolicall, that is, A number of Christians belee­uing and [...], & professing Christianitie; to the sounder part wher­of the properties of One, Holy, Catholicke, Apostolicall, belong. But there is not alwaies in the world an Hierarchiall visible Church, consisting of Prelates and people, vnited in one externall forme of Policie, and profession of Religion, vnder an vniuersall Pope, B to which alone, these foure titles are proper, or principally be­longing. And there may bee an Orthodoxall Apostolicall Church consisting of a small number of inferiour Pastors, and right beleeuing Christians, opposed and persecuted by the Hierarchiall part of the visible Church: euen as in the raigne of king Manasses, and other idolatrous kings of Iuda Occham. Dial. part. 1. lib. 5. cap. 5. Quod autèm Sa­cerdotes summi ve­teris legis, & etiam Iudices principales poterant contrà le­gem iubere, & [...] C [...] veritatem errare, constat ex hoc, quod plures eorum à veritate iudicij & fidei [...], ficut per plura exempla posset ostendi, quod plures summi Pontifices, Sacerdotes, circa tempora Machabeorum legem Domini reliquerunt. Vrias etiàm Sacerdos obediens Regi Achaz, contra legem erexit altare, sicut habetur 4. Reg. 16. Summi etiàm Sacerdotes tempore Christi in multis contrà legem errauerunt. Iudices etiàm Hebreorum nonnulli post Iosue, contrà legem egerunt, & omnes Reges praetèr Dauid, Ezechiam, & Iosiam idololarriam com­miserunt. Quarè & summi Sacerdotes & Iudices in vetere lege contra legem potuerunt iubere., when Idolatrie preuailed among the Priests and generall multitude, there was a remnant of holy people, worshipping God accor­ding to his word, and not defiled with the impietie of those times.

Now concerning the disiunctiue part of the Iesuits Argu­ment, which is, This Church must either be the Roman, or the Pro­testants, or some other opposite to both. It is answered: The Prote­stant Church, is that true and Orthodoxall Church, which is One, Holy, Apostolicke, and a sound part of the Catholicke. D For although the same may be supposed, to haue had beginning in Luthers age, yet this is vntrue, concerning the essence, and kind, and is true onely touching the name, and some things ac­cidentall. For in all ages, and before Luther, some persons held the substantiall articles of our Religion, both in the Roman and Graecian Church. And by name, the Graecians maintained these articles in common with vs, That the Roman Church hath not primacie of Iurisdiction, Authoritie, and Grace aboue or ouer all other Churches: neither is the same infallible in her definitions of Faith. They denie Purgatorie, priuate E Masses, Sacrifice for the dead, and they propugne the mariage of Priests.

In this Westerne part of the world, the Waldenses, Tabo­rites of Bohemia, the Scholers of Wiclife, called in England [Page 105] Lollards, maintained the same doctrine in substance, with the A moderne Protestants, as appeareth by the confession of their Faith Consess. Tabor c. Rokensan, Anno Dom. 1431. Et qui merindoli, Agriae, Costae, &c. Habita­bant ediderunt cōfessionem suā, &c. in qua continentur hij articuli: 1. [...] credendum esse in cis quae ad salutem [...], &c. 2. Sacras literas integrè continere omnia, &c. 3. [...] tantùm esse [...] nec invocandos Sanctos, &c. 4. Purgatorium nullum esse, &c. 5. [...] B esse [...]. 6. Missas quae pro mortuis canuntur impias esse, &c. 7. Traditiones humanas pro neces­sarijs ad [...] habendas non esse. 8. Ieiunia in ciborum discrimine, monochatum Papisticum, Benedictiones creaturarum, &c. perigrinationes, &c. esse humanum inuentum. 9. Primatum Papae super omnes Ecclesias re­ijciunt. 10. Rom. Ecclesiam esse Babilonem in Apocalipsi. 11. Communionem in [...] specie, &c. 12. [...] Papales [...]. 13. Coniugium Sacerdotum esse sanctum, &c., and by the testimonie of some learned Pontificians [...] Hist. li. 5. pa. 460. Tamen ex­titere sempèr per interualla qui eorum doctrinam intermortuam renouarent, Ioh. Wiclevus in Anglia, Ioh. Hus & Hier. Pragensis: nostra verò aetate postquam Lutheri doctrina, obuio tam multorum fauore accepta est, reli­quiae eorum vbiquè sparsae colligi, & crescente Lutheri nomine vires & authoritatem sumere caeperunt, &c. [...], Hist. [...]. lib. 3. & li. 12. Guicciard. Hist. [...]. lib. 13. Anno Dom. 1520. Ex Martini Lutheri, &c. maxima ex parte veteris Bohemorum sectae, quae, &c. diu intrà Bohemiae fines inclusa fuerat, excitatoris, originem habuit.. And concerning certaine differences obiected to haue beene betweene them and vs, we shall afterward shew, that the same are no greater, than such as haue beene antiently among the Fathers, and there are as great differences betweene the Elder and moderne Romists in many passages of their doctrine.

But now on the contrarie, if it were so that we could not (for certaine ages past) nominate or assigne out of historie any C other visible Church besides the Roman or Grecian: yet be­cause right Faith may be preserued in persons liuing in a cor­rupt visible Church, as Wheat among Tares, 1. King. 19. 11. and because God hath promised there shall be alwaies in the world a true Church (hauing either a larger or smaller number of professors;) if Protestants be able to demonstrate that they maintaine the same Faith [...]. d. pre­script. c. Haer. ca. 32. In eadem fide con­spirantes, &c. Apo­stolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae. Jb. ca. 37. Veritas nobis adiudicetur, quicunquè in ea regula D incedimus, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis, [...] à Christo, Christus à Deotradidit. and Religion which the holy Apostles taught, this alone is sufficient to prooue they are the true Church.

IESVIT.

It is also most manifest and vndeniable, that Prote­stants are not such a Church, nor part of such a Church, since their reuoult and separation from the Roman; seeing confessedly they changed their Doctrines they once held, for­sooke E the bodie whereof they were members, broke off from the stocke of that tree whereof they were branches. Nei­ther did they (departing from the Roman) ioine themselues with any other Church professing their particular doctrines, [Page 106] dissonant from it: Ergo, The Romane is the one, holy, Ca­tholicke A and Apostolicall Church, &c.

ANSVVER.

Bold words, ( It is most manifest and vndenyable) miserable proofes (they changed their Doctrine they once held, &c.) If the Pharisees had argued in this manner against Saint Paul, or the Manichees and Pelagians Aug. d. prae dest. sanctor. c. 3. Quem meum [...] opuscula mea satis indicant scrip­ta ante [...] meum. against Saint Augustine, the one would haue told them, That it was no fault to forsake the B leauen of Traditions, to imbrace the Doctrine of the Gospell confirmed by the Prophets; and the other would haue plea­ded most iustly, That it is a vertue and honour, to forsake errour, and to imbrace veritie. Gods people are comman­ded, vpon a grieuous penaltie, to depart out of Babylon and spirituall Sodome, Apoc. 18.4. and Chap. 11.8. Saint Paul, speaking of such as teach diuerse doctrine from the Apostles, saith, [...], Depart from such, from their as­sembly and Church: Reade Acts 19. 8. 1. Corinth. 10. 14. 2. Cor. 6. 14, 15, 17. Hos. 10. 17. The Roman Church, in C those things wherein wee departed from it, was shamefully corrupted; it did not onely forsake, bur depraue and perse­cute the truth of God: the leprosie thereof was incurable, for it would not iudge it selfe, nor bee reprooued by others, nor reforme the least errour, but desperately followed the Ca­non, Si Papa, &c 40. Si Papa suae & fraternae salutis negligens [...], inutilis & remissus in operibus, & insuper à bono taciturnus, quod magis officit sibi & omnibus, nihilominus innumera­biles populos cateruatim secum ducit ad Gehennam cum ipso plagis multis in aeternum vapulatures: huius cul­pas istic redargurere praesumat mortalium nullus, quia cunctos [...] iudicaturus, à nemine est iudicandus.. And none might inioy life and breath within her Precincts, which would not obey her Traditions Tho. D Waldens. Doctrinal. Prefat. ad Martin. 5. Statutum publicum emanauit, quod omnes [...], sicut Dei proditores essent, sic proditores Regis proscriptis bonis censerentur, & regni, duplici poenae dandi, incendio propter Deum, suspendio propter regem..

These Romuleans (vnlesse they were blinded like Elymas) could not be ignorant, at least, of some of their errours and cor­ruptions: but they chose rather in their Tridentine Synode, to proclaime and propugne, apertly or couertly, all their an­tient forgeries, than to compassionate the distressed and [...] Christian world, by mittigating or condescending, ac­cording E to truth, in the smallest matters. It had beene most fa­cile for them, without any preiudice or dammage to them­selues, to haue permitted the Communion of the holy Eucha­rist, in both kindes; the publicke [...] of God in a knowne [Page 107] and vnderstood Language [...] Syluius Hist. Bohem. c. 13-Quum Episcopus qui Slauos [...] ad [...] octauo, sup­plicaret, vt illis sua Lingua in Sacris, vti liceret &c. Au­dita est Vox de Coelo, omnis spi­ritus laudet Domi­num & omnis vox confiteatur ei., to haue abolished the adoration A of Images, &c. But their Luciferian pride and mallice was so transcendent, that they rather presumed to obtrude new Scan­dalls vpon the Christian World, than to vse the least Mode­ration, for the peace of the Church. And euer since that Sy­nod, they haue proceeded from euill to worse, obscuring and out-facing the Truth with Forgerie and Sophistrie: They haue conspired against Kingdomes, and States; they haue surpassed professed Infidels, in perfidious Stratagemes, and immane Crueltie The Massacre of Paris. [...]. Hist. lib. 52. & lib. 53. Nullum similis [...] exemplum, in tota antiquitate reperiri. Natal. Comes. Histor. lib. 25. pa. 508. [...] sexaginta mil­lia hominum, va­rijs in locis per illud tempus, trucidata fuisse dicta sunt in Gallia, &c.. Lastly, whereas they expelled vs by Excommunication, and chased vs away from them by B Persecution; yet this Romane Aduocate taxeth vs of Schisme, and Apostasie, neuer remembring what S. Augu­stine long since deliuered: The Sacriledge of Schisme is then committed, when there is no iust cause of separation August. c. Donat. lib. 5. cap. 1. Apertissi­mum C Sacrilegium Schismatis eminet, si nulla fuit causa separationis.: Or what some of his owne part haue said Dried. d. Eccles. Dogm. lib. 4. cap. 4. Neque tenentur Oues sub esse Pastori vlli qui iam factus est, aut ex. Pastore Lupus, aut saluti gregis contrarius. Francisc. Picus, Mirand. Theor. 23. Capitis autem male sani & deliri contagia vitanda sunt, ne & ipsi artus pestilenti humore tabefierent., The Sheepe are not bound to be subiect to any Shepheard, which is become a Wolfe, or is aduerse to the saluation of the Flocke.

IESVIT.

Which also plainely will appeare to any man of vn­derstanding, that casts vpon her an impartiall eye: For is she not conspicuously one, the professors thereof agreeing D in all points of Faith, howsoeuer they differ about small vndefined Questions.

ANSVVER.

Externall Vnitie is found amongst Infidels: and the Turkes, being more in number than Papists, neuer disagree amongst themselues, touching matters of their Religion: Shall wee then say as the Iesuit doth, It will plainely ap­peare E to any man of vnderstanding, that casts his eye vpon Turkie, that the same hath Veritie, because it is conspi­cuously one?

Saint Augustine saith, That Iewes, Heretikes, and Infidels ob­serue [Page 108] Vnitie against Vnitie [...]. d. verb. [...] [...] & Pa­gani, [...] fe­cerunt, contra [...].. S. Bernard Bernard. As­sump. Mariae, Serm. 5. Sciendum, quod alia est vnitas san­ctorum, quam ex Scripturis commendauimus: Alia est facinorosorum, quae nihilominus ex ipsis Scriptui is, [...] & impro­batur. Psal. 2. 2. Matth. 22. 15., Alia est vnitas A Sanctorum, alia facinorosorum; The Vnitie of Saints is one thing, and the Vnitie of wicked men (Deceiuers) another. S. Hilarie Hilar. lib. ad Constant. Per speciosum nomen pacis, in vnitatem per fidiae subrepimus, &c. pag. 28., Vnitas fidei, & vnitas perfidiae; There is Vnitie of Faith, and there is likewise perfidious and faithlesse Vnitie. S. Gregorie saith Gregor. Moral. lib. 33. cap. 24. B, That the ministers of Antichrist shall cleaue to­gether like the skales of Leuiathan.

Therefore, because externall Vnitie is in it selfe a thing common, and Iewes and Mahometists enioy the same more apparently than many Christians; our Aduersarie must prooue that his Church hath Veritie, before his argument taken from externall Vnitie, can be of any force.

Neither is Papisticall Vnitie so entire and absolute, as this man gloryeth: for Papalls disagree both in Doctrine and Manners. They differ concerning the supreame Authoritie of the Church, Whether it be in the Pope, or in the Ge­nerall C Councell Francisc. Picus. Theorem. 16. Fu­ere qui dicerent, Concilium in cau­sa fidei prae esse Pontifici, fuere qui Pontificem Conci­lio praeponerent: & circa ipsius Sy­nodi collectionem, alia etiam quaestio, vtrum sine Ponti­fice, vtrum eo re­fragante conuocari colligique possit.. They differ in the matter of Free­will, and Grace: They differ concerning the manner of the Conception of the Virgin Marie. There are three Opinions among them, concerning the Temporall dominion of Popes: Some say, he hath direct Temporall power Aluares Pelag. d. Planct. Eccles. lib. 1. ar. 13. August. Anchona Summa, d. Eccles. Pot. qu. 36. art. 2. Carerius, Francisc. Bosius, & alij.; some say, indirect [...]. d. Pontif. Rom. lib. 5. cap. 6. & 7. Aquinas 22. q. 12.; some say hee hath none Hugo Victor. d. Sacrament. lib. 2. par. 2. cap. 7. [...] Patauin. Occham, &c. Ferus, in Matth. cap. 16. Bernard. d. Consid. ad Eugen. lib. 1., but by the free Donation of Princes; and, that Princes were euill aduised, in yeelding him so much Petrus, d. Ferrar. E Singui. Pract. Form. Resp. Rei. Conuent. fol. 45. Male ergo & pessime faciunt Imperatores sustinere quod habeant merum & mixtum Imperium, quia Dominus dixit Petro, conuerte gladium in locum suum, pro­hibens sibi expresse, quod de his se non intromitteret.. And moderne Popes dis­agree with the antient, concerning the Dignitie of vniuer­fall Bishop, adoration of Images, Transubstantiation, Com­munion D in both kinds, and the merit of Good workes. Also, they themselues complaine of grieuous hatred and discord, reigning generally among them; and some of them say, There is greater Concord among Gentiles Ferus, Postil. Serm. 3. d. Coen. Domin. In omnibus gentibus maior nunc est concordia quam inter Christianos.. And when they colour these palpable Dissentions, pretending, that they are readie to submit themselues to the iudge­ment of the Pope: First, this Iudge and Vmpire is many [Page 109] times a Peace-breaker Azor. Instit. Mor. tom. 2. lib. 5. cap. 43. Iohannes Decimus, Leo No­nus, Innocentius Se­cundus, Gregorius Sextus, Iulius Se­cundus, Vrbanus Quartus, ex Sabel­lic. & Bergom., and no Peace-maker Aluar. d. planct. Eccles. Lib. 2. art. 5. Nec sunt hodie Praelati, Principes pacis, sicut Chri­stus, Esay 9. sed Guerrae. Sigebert. Anno 1085. Matth. Paris. Chronic. Greg. Papa, confessus est suadente Diabolo se iram & odium inter huma­num genus concitasse. Otho Frising. Chron. lib. 6. cap. 33. Quos dum Leo Papa, cum militia ad vrbem rediens Ecclesiae & Imperij finibus arcere vult, Tanta strages facta fuit, quod acerus ex ossibus mortuorum compactus hactenus ab indiginis illic monstratur. Ibid. cap. 36. Quanta mala quot bella, bellorumque discrimina vnde secuta sunt, quoties misera Roma obsessa, capta vastata, quod Papa super Papam sicut Rex super Regem positus fuerit tedet memorare. Auentin. Annal. Boiorum, lib. 6. pag. 480. per triginta tres annos à Gregorio & Vrbano con­tinenter sanguine, [...] belligeratum est. Nauclerus ex Hermanno. Guelphorum & Gibellinorum factiones, &c. quae deinceps a Gregorio 9. nutritae, adeo late serpsere vt nulla ciuitas nullum oppidum, nullus populus, ea tabe perniciosissima intactus remanserit, vrbs enim in vibem, Prouincia in Prouinciam, haec populi pars in al­teram, nulla impellente alia quam harum partium causa, vsque ad haec nostra tempora miro [...] inter se sae­uiere. Abbas Vsperg. in Philip. Imper. Tunc coeperunt multiplicari mala in terris. Ortae sunt siquidem in C hominibus, simultates doli perfidiae vt se inuicem tradant in mortem & interitum, Rapina deprae dationes, depo­pulationes terrarum vastationes incendia, seditiones bella & rapinae siue in stratis siue in latrocinijs iustificatae sunt, vt omnis homo iam sit periurus, & praedictis facinoribus implicatus, vt vix excusari possit, quin sit in [...] ficut populus sic Sacerdos, tribulatio magna prohibuit hoc, vt nec quis de villa sua possit procedere secure [...] in proximam villam., an Ismael in A the Christian World, whose hand is against euerie man, and euerie mans hand is against him. Secondly, Vnitie which is founded on blind Obedience, is onely an Vnitie of Pollicie, and not of true Faith. Thirdly, this submission maketh not actuall Concord: and miserable Dissention, both intestine and forraine, at home and abroad, rageth betweene Popes and Princes, and betweene one Popish Faction and another. The Guelphes and Gibellines, the Papalls and Imperialls, are as famous in Histories for their Discord, as the sonnes of Cadmus; and when Papistrie was most potent, the Chri­stian B World was most distracted.

IESVIT.

Apparently vniuersall, so spread ouer the World, with Credit and Authoritie, that whole Mankind may take suf­ficient notice of her, and her Doctrine, for the embra­cing D thereof.

ANSWER.

The Roman is a particular Church, and not vniuersall: it is onely an vnsound member of the whole, and not the whole. Rom. 1. 6. S. Paul saith: [...] Chrys. ad Rom. Hom. 1. Romanis scribens qui velut in quodam totius Orbis, vertice constituti erant, nihil prae reliquis gentibus illis praecipui ad­scribit. Neque enim ideo quod tum potentes erant & regnabant plus [...] spiritualium eos habere dicit: sed quemadmodum inquit omnibus gentibus praedicamus ita & vobis, connumerans [...] & Scythis, ac Thracibus, nisi enim hoc significare voluisset superfluum erat dicere in quibus estis & vos. Theodoret. sup. Rom. cap. 1. Eos, non E vt qui totius Orbis terrarum Dominium obtinerent, ab alijs gentibus secreuit, sed alijs commiscuit. Theophilact. ibid. Hic tollit eorum cogitationem de Primatu. Non enim inquit alias antecellitis gentes, [...] Imperium vo­bis vsurpetis: verum enim perinde ac caeteris, sic vobis praedicamus, ne igitur turgeatis fastu. Oecumen. ibid. [...]., Among whom, are yee also. [Page 110] But a Church which is but one amongst the rest, cannot be the A whole and vniuersall Church. It is as absurd to say, that the Romane Church is the vniuersall Church, as to affirme that England is the vniuersall World.

If the vniuersall Church be taken properly, or absolute­ly, it comprehendeth both the Triumphant and Militant Church: Augustine Enchir. cap. 56. and 61. Couaruuias, Resol. Lib. 4. cap. 14. If it be taken restrictiuely, it is the whole Church Militant of each Age. If Catholike be taken for that which is Orthodoxall in Faith, and which holdeth no diuision with the common Bodie of Christianitie (accor­ding B to which notion, the Fathers tearme particular Chur­ches Catholike Cyprian. Epist. 64. & Epist. 69. & Epist. 73. Constan­tius, ap. Socrat. Hist. Eccles. Lib. 1. cap. 6. & Lib. 2. cap. 2. Greg. Naz. in Testam. apud Brisson. d. form. Lib. 7. Vincent. Lyr. contr. Haer. cap. 25.) then neyther is this Title proper to the Romane Church alone, neyther can Papists iustly assume the name of Catholike, vntill they haue proued their Faith to be Orthodoxall, and iustified themselues from being the Authors of Discord in the Christian World.

And to answere that which followeth; although the Ro­mane Church is spread ouer sundrie parts of the World, C because some people professing the Romane Faith, trauaile or reside in many Countreyes, and exercise their Religion where they trauaile, or liue; yet this will not demonstrate, that it is the Church vniuersall: For both the Iewes, and also sundrie Christians The Syrians, or Melchites, Geor­gians, Russians, Nestorians, Christi­ans of S. Thomas in India, Iacobites, Copthi, Habas­sines, Armenians, Maronites., which are no Romists, are largely diffused ouer the World, and exercise their Religion in pla­ces where they make their abode; and there is nothing more presumptuous, than to make externall Fame and Ampli­tude Greg. Nazian. Orat. d. Seipso, c. Arrian. Vbi illi sunt, qui Ecclesiam multitudine definiunt. Chrysost. ad Pop. Antioch. Hom. 40. August. sup. Psal. 39. (which are things common, and separable) proper notes of a true Church; and vpon this ground, to reiect D and censure smaller Churches, which haue lesse fame in the World, but more Veritie.

IESVIT.

Most manifestly Holy, in all kind of high extraor­dinarie E Sanctitie, giuing notorious signes and tokens thereof, striking admiration into carnall men, that are not altogether prophane, and diffusing abroad, among [Page 111] Infidels, the sweete Odour of Christ, and the Christi­an A Name.

ANSWER.

Passing by your boasting of Manifestly Holy, in all kind of high and extraordinarie Holinesse, notorious, striking admiration, &c. And putting you in mind of Solomons Prouerbe: There is a man that boasteth himselfe to be rich, and yet hath nothing: Prou. 13. 7.

I answere the matter, first, You must be aduertised that Gre­gory, B Moral. l. 33. c. 26. saith, Praedicatores Antichristi sanctitatis sibi speciem arrogant, sed tamen opera iniquitatis exercent: Anti­christs Preachers arrogate vnto themselues a shew of holinesse, and practise the workes of iniquitie. This will be verified in such as you are, if your forme of externall holinesse bee not conioyned with holy and Orthodoxall Doctrine. You must therefore first of all prooue your doctrine to be Orthodoxall, in the Articles in question betweene the reformed Churches and you, before your miracles and specious holinesse can stand C you in any stead: And there is no kind of externall holinesse, which heretickes haue not pretended, and practised in shew be­fore men.

Secondly, your owne friends and followers testifie, That your Church hath beene for many ages, notoriously defiled with the enormitie of vices: Some of them say Gerson. to. 4. [...]. Brugis scripta. p. 51. in generall tearmes, that from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foot, the vlcerous matter of enormous sinne, hath defiled and deformed the whole body and state of Christianitie, liuing vnder your profession. Others affirme, that all Ecclesiasticall Concil. Basil. Resp. Synodal. p. 139. Surius. and Christian discipline, was in a man­ner D extinguished in euery place. Others say, that oppression, Concil. Lateran. sub Iulio 2. Oratio [...]. Surius tom. 4. pag. 520. Ita in sanctam nauiculam impetum facere vt penè [...] flu­ctibus illa latus de­derit, & prope mer­ia & pessundata [...] rapine, adulterie, incest, and all pestilent vice, did confound all sacred and pro­phane things, and that the same beat S. Peters ship so impetuously, that it began to hull or wallow vpon the to-side. Others, [...] in Mar­cellino primo. that vices were so exalted and multiplied, that they hardly left any space to Gods mercie. Others say, [...]. disp. d. Repub. lib. 1. cap. 12. pag. 73. Espenc. com. T t. cap. 1. pag. 71. Tot in Ecclesiam abusus, & grauissimos morbos irrupisse, quibus ad [...], & [...] fama ad in fideles vsque dimanet Christianismum deridentes, &c. there is no place wherein is found so little pietie and Religion, as in those people which dwell neerest to Rome. Others say, [...] [...] in adag. Dulce belium inexpertis. that you haue not onely imitated and matched, but surpassed all the auarice, ambition, lubricitie, and tyrannie, that was euer heard of amongst the heathen. Sundrie of your owne part Aluar. Pelag. d. planct. Ecclesiae Nichol. Clemang. Onus [...]. Poth. d. stat. Domus Dei. haue writ­ten E volumes, containing Narrations of the outragious wicked­nesse [Page 112] which raigned among [...] They haue stiled your grand A fathers, Monsters of mankind [...] in Ioh. 13., The dregs of vice, Incarnate deuils, &c Concil. Constant. Seff. 11. ar. 5.. One saith, Auentin Anal. Boiorum l. 3. p. 211. Nothing was more luxurious, coue­tous and proud, than Priests; they spent the Churches patrimonie, in gluttonie, ryot, vpon dogs, and queanes, and all their preaching was to [...]. Matthew Paris saith, Chron. in Hen­rico 3. pag. 535. The [...] of Rome seeke not to make people deuout; but to fill their coffers with treasure; they studie not to win soules, but to [...] vpon o­ther mens reuenues; they oppresse the godly, and impudently vsurpe other mens right; they haue no care of honestie or right. King Iohn of England, Math. Paris. ib. anno 1213. p. 327 from whom Pope Innocent extorted fortie thou­sand B markes at once, and twelue thousand annually, to absolue his kingdome, being interdicted, said, That he had learned by wo­full experience, that the Pope was ambitious, beyond all men liuing, an insatiable, gulfe, and thirster after monie, and readie for hope of gaine, like waxe, to be [...] to any kind or degree of [...]. Aluares hath these words, Aluar. d. planct. Eccles. lib. 2. art. 5. litera Aleph. Vid. Surium. tom. 4. Con­cil. pag. 820. 824. 569. 579. 642. Ab­bas Vsperg. an. 99. Luithprand. vit. Pap. lib. 6. c. 6. Dionys. Carthus. Ep. in fine commentar. Apoc. Naclantus. Medulla script. in praelud. c. 4. Petrus [...]. pag. 39. & 40. Berchor. Dictionar. v. [...]. The mysticall Sion, the Church, which in her primitiue state was adorned of her spouse, with such, and so many royall graces, is now clouded and eclipsed, with the blacke mist of ig­norance, iniquitie, and errour, and we behold her cast downe from hea­uen, and as a desart vnhabited of vertue, and if any godly people re­maine, C they are esteemed as Arabians and Saracens. And in the same place Ibid. art. 17. Roderic. spec. pag. 316. Dies. postil: Ser. 4. d. Nat. Dom. pag. 363. Thom. Frater lib. d. Condit. Praelat. The Prelates of the Church are an armie of deuils: Po­tius depraedandis & spoliandis & scandalizandis hominibus quam lu­cris animarum operam dantes: They rather labour to rob, spoile, and scandalise men, than to win soules.

Honorius Angustodonensis Honor. Angust. Dial. d. [...]. & lib. [...]. Verte te ad Ciues Babyloniae, & vide quales sint & per quas tendant plateas, &c. Vide veni huc ad supercilium mon­tis, & cuncta possis aedificia cemere damnatae ciuitatis, Intuere Principes eius & Iudices (nempe Cardinales [...], &c.) Ecce posita est in eis bestiae sedes. Omni tempore ad malum sunt intenti semper negotijs iniquitatis inexplebiliter occupati, flagitia non solum faciunt, sed & alios facere instruunt: sancta vendunt scelera emunt totis [...] laborant, ne soli ad Tartara veniant. Verte te ad Clerum, & videbis in eis Bestiae [...], Dei seruitium negligunt, terrenis lucris inseruiunt, Sacerdotium per immunditiem polluunt, popu­lum per [...] seducunt, Deum per mala opera ab negant omnes Scripturas ad salutem pertinentes ab­dicam, omnibus modes laqueos ad ruinam populo substernunt, quem caecum ipsi caeci ad interitum praece­dunt. Contemplare & Monachorum conciliabula, & videbis in eis Bestiae Tabernacula per fictam professionem Deum irridentes iram eius prouocant normam regularem moribus & vita calcant, per habitum seculum fallunt, [...] deceptos decepti ipsi decipiunt, secularibus negotijs impliciti sunt, [...] seruitio Dei desides existunt: pleri­que E illorum gulae & [...] dediti sunt, quidam in immunditiae sorde computrescunt. Aspice etiam habita­cula monialium & cernes in eis Bestiae praeparatum Thalamum. Hae à tenera aetate impudicitiam discunt com­plices sibi plurimas ad cumulum suae damnationis adsciscunt, vel se operire festinant quo magis fiaena [...] laxare queant. Omnibus fornicarijs peius prosternuntur, & vt insatiabilis Charybdis nunquam stercore immun­ditiae replentur. Hae animas [...] illaqueant, & gaudent si plures illaqueant: atque haec vult palmam vi­ctoriae quae alijs praeualet in scelere., who liued in the yeere 1120. D hath these words: Turne thee to the citisens of Babylon, and obserue what manner of people they be, and by what streetes they walke; come hi­ther [Page 113] to the top of the mountaine, that thou mayest behold all the habi­tations A of the damned citie. Looke vpon her Princes and Iudges (Popes, Cardinals, Prelates) the verie seate of the beast is placed in them. All dayes they are intent to euill, [...] occupied (without satietie) in the works of iniquitie: they not onely themselues act, but instruct others to fla­gitious wickednesse; they make port-sale of things sacred, they pur­chase that which is wicked, and labour with all their might, that they may not descend alone to hell. Turne thy selfe to the Clergie, and thou shalt see in them the tent of the beast: they neglect Gods seruice, they are slaues to worldly lucre, they defile their Priesthood through vn­cleannesse, B they seduce the people by hypocrisie, they deny God by euill workes, they abandon all the Scriptures appointed for mans saluation, they lay snares all manner of wayes to ruine the people, and are blind guides, going before the blinde to perdition. Contemplate also the so­cieties of Monkes, and thou shalt discerne in them the tabernacles of the Beast: by faigned profession, they mocke God, and prouoke his wrath, they betrample their rule with vile manners, they deceiue the world by their habit, &c. Many of them are deuoted to gluttonie, and sensuall appetite: they putrifie in the filth of vncleannesse. Be­hold the habitation of Nunnes, and thou shalt obserue in them, a Bride­chamber C prepared for the Beast: These from their tender yeeres learne leaudnesse, they associate many to them, to accumulate their damnation; They make haste to bee vailed, that they may more freely let loose the reines of luxurie; they are prostituted worse than any Harlots, like an insatiable gulfe, they are neuer satisfied with the dung of vnclean­nesse: These insnare the soules of yong men, and shee among them which transcendeth her fellowes in leaudnesse, beares away the bell.

b [...]. Annal. Boior. l. 7. p. 530. Quemcun que sceleris obnoxium, parricidio, incestu, sacrilegio, pol­lutum, continuo vbi cruciculam vesti assuisset, solutum esse & crimine & poena declamitabant, quippe his aliter ab E auditoribus vt fit acceptis, maximam foenestram ad ne quitiam patefecerunt: plerique ansa hinc accepta inimicos suos prius tollebant, hinc in militiam sacram nomina dabant. [...]. com. Tit. 1. p. 67. Prostat & in quaestu pro me­retrice sedet, liber palam ac publice, hic impressus, hodie que vt olim venalis Taxa Camerae, siue Cancellariae A­postolicae, in scriptus, in quo plus scelerum discas licet, quam in omnibus vitiorum [...], & summarijs & plu­rimis quidem licentia, omnibus autem absolutio empturientibus, proposita. pa. 68. Habeat iam Roma pudorem, & [...] nullius frontis criminum, omne genus catalogum, prostituere desinat. Thirdly, the Roman Church hath many passages in the ve­rie course of Doctrine, to destroy or corrupt holinesse: for to omit their grosse superstitions, Pharisaicall Traditions, and D other impieties against God: First, They depriue people of the reading and hearing of the holy Scripture, which is a prin­cipall meanes to destroy Vice, and kindle Vertue Ambr. Hexam. l. 1. c. 8. Chrys. sup. Ioh. ho. 58. & ad Pop. Antioch. Ho. 1. & sup. Genes. Ho. 10. & Hom. 35. Am­bros. ser. 35. Cyril. c­lulian. lib. 7. p. 160. Fran. Picus. Theo­rem. 5., Deut. 31. 21. Secondly, Their doctrine of Pardons ministred daily oc­casion of intollerable wickednesse. For although their Schole­men plastered the same with subtle distinctions, yet the people entertained them according to the outward letter, and practi­sed accordingly. Thirdly, By some part of their doctrine they [Page 114] [...] people to commit sinne. Equiuocation is a doctrine of A Periurie. To affirme that it is lawfull to depose Princes, and take away their [...] in case of Heresie, is a plaine doctrine of [...] worse than murder; and if the Pope may command murder, why may he not also command adulterie, theft, and blasphemie. The doctrine of the Popes authoritie, to dispence with oathes Walsingham. Edwar. 1. p. 61. Ob­tinuit rex a Domi­no Papa absolutio­nem à iuramento, &c. vsus consuetudine & caurela paterna qui quoties instabat necessitas, de faciliiurare voluit se [...] suorum & eadem [...] voluit [...] quoties sibi tempus commodior accideret, B praetendens Papalem absol. à [...]., is perilous and pernitio us to the safetie of man­kind, making way to all kind of fraud and iniustice.

If the Roman Church be so apparantly and infinitly holy, why doth it openly maintaine Stewes, and receiue yearely tri­bute Constit. Otho. d. Concub. Cler. rem. Videtur quod crimen Meretricij Ecclesia sub dissi­mulatione transire debeat, nam & Ma­rischallus Papae de facto exigit tribu­tum a meretricib'., and part stake with Harlots? and wherefore are Sanctu­aries the harbours and dennes of Assisines, and other enormous delinquents, tollerated and supported by this Church? It is a monstrous doctrine which was hatched by Pope Vrban Inocent. part. 10. c. 34. Grat. Caus. 23. q. 5. cap. 47. Ex­communicatorum., and approoued by Baronius Baron. Anno 1089. n. 11. Non eos homicidas arbitra­mur, qui aduersus excommunicatos zelo Catholicae matris ardentes, eorum quosdam trucidare contigerit., That they are not to be iudged murthe­rers which slay excommunicate persons. The exemption of [...] from being tried in Causes Criminall, before Christi­an C Magistrates, is a doctrine which maketh way to most outra­gious offences, Gulielmus Nubrigensis, lib. 2. cap. 16. Roger. Houeden. Annal. part. Poster. [...] volebat Presbiteros, Diaconos, Subdiaconos, & alios Ecclesiae Rectores, si comprehensi fuissent in latrocinio, vel murdra, vel felonia, vel iniqua combustione, vel in hijs similibus, ducere ad Secularia examina, & punire, sicut & Laicum. Contrà quod Archiepiseopus dicebat &c. D The Iudges complained that there were many robberies, and rapes, and murthers, to the number of an hundred then presently committed within the realme by Ecclesiasticall persons (vpon presumption of exempti­on from the censure of the lawes.)

We cannot be persuaded that the Roman Church is holy in such high and extrordinarie manner as our Aduersarie boa­steth, because the greatest Clerkes of that societie, vndertake the defence of such impieties as are detestable in Nature, and condemned by the light of common Reason. Garnets Powder­plot hath many Patrons. Cardinall Baronius commendeth to Baron. Anno 1106. n. 14. Quis negare [...] summū fu­isse hoc pietatis ge­nus in hoc se exhi­buisse crudelem? Immo ex eo quod non [...] vinculis strinxerit &c. nihil habes in quo damnes [...], magis quam si vehementi faebre phre­netico, deliranti, [...], furentique, pius filius [...] vincula [...], si vere intuitu pietatis, vt facere prae se tulit ea omnia prestitit. the skies, yong Henrie the Emperors sonne for rebelling against his naturall father, for deposing, imprisoning, and bringing him with sorrow to the graue: what Turke or Sauage would be the encomiast of such vnnaturall and enormous villanie? E

IESVIT. A

Most [...] Apostolicall, [...] a most glorious succession of Bishops and Pastors from the Apostles, fa­mous in all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie, who were neuer noted as deliuering [...] doctrines the one to the other. In which proofe that these properties agree to the Roman, and be wanting in the Protestant Church, J B will not inlarge my selfe as I otherwise might, as well not to wearie your Maiestie, as also not to seeme to diffide (the matter being most cleere) of your Maiesties judgement: wherefore it is more than cleere, That the Roman Church is the One, Holy, Catholicke, Apostolicke Church, by whose Tradition Christian Religion hath beene, is, and shall be euer continued from the Apostles to the worlds end.

ANSVVER. C

First, If the present Roman Church do want the life and soule of Apostolicall Succession, to wit, Apostolicall Doctrine, locall and titular Succession is only a Pharisaicall cloake, or a painted wall, Acts 23.3. and common to Caiaphas, Paul Sa­mosaten, Nestorius, and to many other notorious Heretickes Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. fid. vol. [...]. du. 24. c. 14. [...] haeresis, ibi fides [...], & proindè ratio verae Ecclesiae [...]: quia forma constitutiua Ecclesiae est vera fides. Vndè cum constet Ecclesiam. Graecam carere verae [...] successio, ad tuendam atquè arguendam pro ea rationem verae Ecclesiae. Bosius, d. sig. [...]. lib. 17 ca. 5. Qua in re maxime obseruan­dum, non esse perpetuum in ijs Ecclesijs ordinem ( [...]) [...], qui fuerit interruptus ab Episco­pis D qui haeretica decreuerint. 416. Stapl. princip. Doctr. li. 13. ca. 6. Nec vbi adhuc durat talis personalis successio, Catholicae tamèn successioni quicquam habet affine aut simile, quia proptèr haereses quas tenent, & scisma quod faciunt, legitima illa successio non est. Ambros. d. [...]. li. 1. ca. 6. Non habent haereditatem Petri, qui fidem Petri non habent..

Secondly, The visible Succession of the Bishops and Pastors of the said Church from the Apostles, is not most glorious and famous, by the report of all monuments of Historie and Anti­quitie Abbas. Vsperg. Cron. pag. 307. Vix remansit aliquis E­piscopatus, siuè dignitas Ecclesiastica, quae non [...] litigiosa, & Romam deduceretur ipsa causa, sed non [...] thesaurorum in terra, vt ad te E [...], & aggeres [...] in [...] copia. [...] supèr iniquitate filiorum hominum, quoniam in recompensationem [...] malorum [...] tibi [...]. Iocundare super [...] tua discordia, quià erupit de puteo infernalis abissi, vt accumulentur tibi multa pecuniarum praemia. Habes quod sempèr sitisti, decanta [...] trahit homines, non ipsorum de­uotio aut pura conscientia, sed scelerum multiplicium perpetratio, & litium decisio praecio [...].: but the same hath beene notoriously distained in lat­ter times, by Simoniacall entrance of Popes and Prelats, by [Page 116] Schysmaticall intrusions, and by commutation of the forme A of election of Pastors appointed by the Apostles, and exerci­sed in the Primatiue Church. And whereas the Aduersarie contendeth that Roman Bishops and Pastours hane Succession of doctrine, because Ecclesiasticall Historie is silent, in noting latter Popes for deliuering contrarie doctrines the one to the other, both the Illation it selfe, and the antecedent, or ground of the Illation are false.

First, it is inconsequent to inserre negatiuely from humane Historie, and to say Histories are silent, and therefore no such matter was. Our Sauiour prooueth the Pharisees and Saddu­ces B to be errants, because their present doctrine was repugnant to the Scripture: and had the Pharisees or Sadduces replied, That their doctrine was the same which Moses & the Prophets taught, because they had Snccession, and Histories were silent when they changed the antient Faith; they had iustified them­selues vpon as good grounds as Papals do.

Secondly, it is false, which this disputer venteth so confi­dently, That Histories and antient Monuments are altogether silent of the Innouations which were made by latter Popes: and we are able (as in due place it shall appeare) to produce te­stimonies C of Historie to the contrarie.

IESVITS 2. Argument.

Protestants haue the holy Scriptures deliuered vnto them by and from the One, Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolical Church: but they receiued them from no other Church than the Roman, Ergo the Roman is the One, Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolicke Church. D

ANSVVER.

This Sillogisme is peccant in forme, and both the propositi­ons are affirmatiue in the second figure; which I note the ra­ther, because the Aduersarie at the end of his Argument cry­eth Victoria, saying, An Argument conuicting and vnanswerable. I must therefore reduce the same to a lawfull forme, and then answer.

That Church by and from which the Protestants receiue the E Scriptures is the Only, Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolicke Church.

The Protestants receiue the Scriptures from the Roman Church, Ergo

[Page 117] The Roman Church to the Only, Holy, Catholicke, and Apo­stolicke A Church.

First, If this Argument be conuicting and vnanswerable, as the Iesuit boasteth, then these which follow are such.

That, from which the Russians receiued the Scriptures, is the Only, Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolicke Church.

The Russians receiued the Scriptures from the Greeke Church, Ergo

The Greeke Church is the Only, Holy, Catholicke, and Apo­stolicke Church. B

Also, that Church from which the Apostles receiued the Scrip­tures was the true Church.

The Apostles receiued the Scriptures from the Sinagogue of the Iewes, gouerned by the Pharisees, Ergo

The Synagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees was the true Church.

The deliuerie of the Text of the holy Scriptures is common to the true, and corrupt Church, and not proper to the Only, C Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolicke Church: as appeareth by the Synagogue, which being a corrupt Church at the time of our Sauiours Aduent, yet by the speciall prouidence of God, preserued and deliuered the Text of the old Testament, Rom. 3.2. And S. Agustine Aug sup. Psal. 41. Modò nobis ser­uiunt Iudaei, tan­quam Capsarij no­stri sunt, studenti­bus nobis codices portant. Id. d. Con­sens. D Euang. lib. 1. c. 26. testifieth of the Iewes, That they were Li­brarie keepers Aug. sup. Psal. 56. Codicem portat [...] vndè credat Christianus: Librarij no­stri facti sunt &c. Idem d. Diuinat. Daem. ca. 7. to Christians, of the Bookes of the Law and Prophets. And S. Hierom saith Hierom. sup. [...] saiam c. 6. [...] si aliquis dixerit Hebraeos Libros posteà à Iudaeis esse falsatos, audiat Originem quid in octauo volumine explanationum Esaiae, huic re­spondeat quaestiunculae, quod nunquam Dominus & Apostoli qui caetera crimina arguunt in Scribis & Pharisaeis, de hoc crimine quod erar maximum [...]: sin autèm dixerint post [...], & praedicatio­nem Apostolorum Libros [...] falsatos chachinnum tenere non potero, [...] Saluator & Euangelistae & Apostoli ita testimonia protulerint, vt Iudaei posteà falsaturi erant. Ioseph. c. Appion. li. 1. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 9. [...]. Id. d. Praep. Euang. li. 8. ca. 2. Ex Philone. [...] annorum millibus, [...] maiore tempore iàm transacto, nec verbum vnum in lege illius esse immutatum, sed centies vnusquisquè [...] morietur potiùs quam legi Mosaicae derogabit, pa 141., That the Hebrews did not corrupt the Text of the old Testament. Also the Donatists and Nouatians deliue­red the incorrupt Text of holy Scripture to their followers.

Secondly, the proposition of the former Argument hath E another defect. The Text of holy Scriptures may be deliue­red by a particular Church, which is but a member of the vni­uersall, and therefore it is inconsequent to conclude, That be­cause the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from the Roman [Page 118] Church, therefore they receiued them, to wit, immediatly from A the vniuersall Church.

The Minor proposition, to wit, the Protestants receiued the Scriptures, from no other Church than from the Romane, may be taken in a double sence.

For either it may be vnderstood originally, and by way of au­thoritie: that is: The Protestants receiued the Scriptures, both originally and deriuatiuely, from, and by the authoritie of the Romane Church onely; or else it may bee vnderstood indi­catiuely:

The Protestants receiued the Scriptures by the hand of the B Romane Church, and were first of all instructed, and told by that Church, that the same were diuine Bookes: yet they re­ceiued them not onely or principally from that church, but al­so, from the Primitiue Church, which led them originally to the Apostles themselues Aug. c. Faust. Manich. lib. 11. ca. 2. Palam est quantum in re dubia ad fidem & certitudinem valeat Catholicae Ecclesiae Authoritas, quae ab ipsis fun­datissimis sedibus Apostolorum vs (que) in hodiernum diem, succedentibus sibimet Episcopis, secundum seriem suc­cessionis & tot populorum consensione [...]. Driedo. d. Eccles. Dogmat. l. 2. c. 3. Scriptura cognoscebatur esse Sacra & vera, ex ea quae tunc erat Ecclesia, cui ipse Christus perhibuit testimonium, viua voce Signorū & pro­digiorum attestatione. Proinde fides tunc ex persona probanda veniebat. In Ecclesia autem quae [...] est, Chri­stus nec sic praesens propria voce loquitur, nec se loqui ostendit sub attestatione prodigiorum & signorum, nec C spiritus Sanctus in ea iam ita manifestus apparet in signorum & prodigiorum attestationibus, quibus nunc non opus est, ad corroborandum Euangeliorum doctrinam, olim multifariam & sufficienter corroboratam. Proinde fi­des non amplius ex personis probanda venit, sed contrario ex sua fide probantur personae, sicut & ex [...] Sacris cognoscitur ea quae nunc est Ecclesia..

And besides the former Tradition, by reading and studying the holy Scriptures, they learned sufficient matter, out of those heauenly bookes, to confirme them, that they were diuine, and of God. Philemon receiued S. Pauls Epistle by the hand of One­simus, he did not esteeme Onesimus a seruant, who had beene a fugitiue, an infallible witnesse in himselfe: but the argument D and contents of S. Pauls Epistle, persuaded him that S. Paul was the Author. A man may receiue the Kings Proclamation, from off a pillar, or his great Seale by the hand of a meane clarke: So likewise the bookes of holy Scriptures are first conueyed vnto vs by Ecclesiasticall testimonie and Tradition: but they con­taine heauenly veritie, and doctrine within themselues, which persuade the diligent readers and learners of them, that they are diuine.

IESVIT. E

The Maior I prooue. If Protestants haue not the Text of Scripture, by and from, the one, holy, Catholicke and Apostolicke Church, they cannot be certaine they haue [Page 119] the true incorrupt Text the Apostles deliuered, and re­commended A as Diuine, to the first [...]; seeing the Tradition of any other Church is fallible, and may de­ceiue. And if it may deceiue, how can they be certaine that they are not deceiued, seeing they themselues liued not in the Apostles dayes, to see with their owne eyes what Copies the Apostles deliuered. But Protestants, as they pretend, be certaine that they haue the true incorrupt Apostolicall Text of Scripture: Ergo, they haue it vpon B the Authoritie of the holy Catholike Apostolike Church.

ANSWER.

The Argument whereby the Aduersarie confirmeth his Maior, is this:

If the Protestants receiue the Scriptures from any other, but the Holy Catholique Church, they cannot be certaine that the same are in­corrupt, because a fallible Witnesse may deceiue.

Answ. They which receiue the Scriptures from the hands C of a corrupt Church, may be deceiued, if there be not some other infallible meanes, besides the Testimonie of that Church, to assure them. But if that Church be onely a Messenger, to deliuer, and there be found in the thing deliuered that which is certaine and infallible in it selfe, to wit, the Testimonie of the Apostles, and of the Spirit of God, speaking in and by those Scriptures Gregor. Moral. Lib. 16. cap. 17. In Scriptura eius quasi os eius intuentur; quia Deus per e­am loquitur omne quod vult. ( Acts 24. 25.) then they which immedi­ately receiue the Text of the Scripture from a fallible Church, may be certaine that they are not deceiued.

It is not necessarie, that the Messenger, by and from whose D hands wee receiue immediately the Text of the Scriptures, should be infallible in all things; for then wee must receiue them from the hands of no particular Church, or particular Councell, vnconfirmed by the Pope, or from any particular Pastour of the Church, because these are fallible: And ac­cording to our Aduersaries Tenet, infallibilitie of Iudge­ment is found onely in the Pope, and Councell confirmed by him Greg. Val. to. 3. Disp. 2. Punct. 2. pag. 30. Bellarm. d. Concil. lib. 2. c. 2..

And from hence it will in like sort follow, that for the E first two or three hundred yeeres (beginning from the death of the Apostles) in which time there was no generall Coun­cell Bellarm. d. Con­cil. lib. 1. c. 10. Pri­mis trecentis annis caruit Ecclesia [...] generalibus., yea, for certaine Ages, after generall Councels began, vntill the Canon of the Scripture was expressely assigned by some generall or particular Councell, confirmed by the Pope, [Page 120] Christians should haue remained vncertaine, touching the sa­cred A Authoritie of Diuine Scripture, because the meanes by which they receiued them immediately, were fallible.

The Authoritie of the holy Scripture dependeth vpon the immediate Messenger which deliuereth the Bookes vnto vs, no more than the Authoritie of the Kings Proclamation de­pendeth vpon the Sergeant who proclaymes it, or sets it vpon a Pillar, to be read of all men, but vpon the first Diuine Wit­nesses, which wee know to be the Authors of the Scripture: not because Pope Paul the fifth, or Clement the eight say so, but because the Witnesses themselues affirme it in their Scrip­ture, Read before, pag. 13. &c. B or deliuer that in their Scripture, by which it is prooued, to such as are eleuated by Grace, and taught of God.

IESVIT.

Now the Minor, That they haue the Scripture from the Romane, is apparent: For what other Church did de­liuer vnto Luther the Text of the Bible? assuring him, that they had it by Tradition of Ancestors, time out of C mind, as giuen originally by the Apostles: which is accor­dingly acknowledged by M. Whitaker, and others, but Whitak. Lib. d. Ec­cles. pag. 369. M. Doue in his Per­suasion, pag. 13. Luther, contra A­nabaptist. particularly, by Luther himselfe: Ergo, the Romane Church is the one, holy, Catholike, Apostolike Church, whose Tradition doth deliuer infallibly vnto vs the Text of Scripture.

ANSVVER.

The Protestants receiuing the Bookes of holy Scripture by D the hand of the Roman Church, proueth not the said Church to be the onely holy Catholike and Apostolike Church, any more, than the receiuing of Baptisme by Heretikes, or the Old Testament by the Synagogue (of which the Pharisees were a part) proue the same to be the true infallible Church.

IESVIT.

And if the true Apostolicall Text, then also the true Apostolicall Sense. E

ANSWER.

The sequele is denyed: For it is not necessarie, that they which truly deliuer the Text, shall also truly deliuer the Apo­stolicall [Page 121] sense: and on the contrarie, a lying sence may be deli­uered A by them, which retaine the true and incorrupt Letter of the Text, as appeareth by the Pharisees, Arrians Hilar. ad [...] pa. 281. [...] Scripturas fine sensu [...]. [...] contra [...]. pag. 67. [...]. [...] 1. in [...]., Donatists, and many other Heretikes Greg. Nazianz. c. Apol­linar. Tertull. d. Prescript. cap. [...] Ista Haerefis si [...] integras praestat, &c. Nihilominus di­uersas [...] commentata [...], &c. Ibid. cap. 38. [...]: lib. 3. cap. 12. [...] quidem [...], interpretationes vero conuertunt..

IESVIT.

This I proue. If the Apostles did not deliuer the bare B Text, but together with the Text, the true sense of Scrip­ture, to be deliuered perpetually vnto posteritie; then they who by Tradition receiue from the Apostles the true Text, must together receiue the true sense. But all prin­cipall Protestants affirme, No man doubteth, but the Pri­mitiue [...]. in Exam. Concil. Trid. part. 1. fol. 74. Church receiued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men, not onely the Text of Scripture, but also the right Doct. Bancroft Sur­uey, pag. 379. and natiue sense, which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the [...]. [...]. cap. 2. C Fathers; that from the Apostles, together with the Text, descends the Line of Apostolicall interpretation, squared according to the Ecclesiasticall and Catholike sense.

ANSVVER.

The Assumption of the former Argument, to wit, The Read before, pag. 45. &c. Apostles, together with the Text, deliuered the true sense of all their Scriptures to those people to whom they wrote, is vncertaine. D They deliuered (no doubt) the sense of the Scriptures, where they preached, so [...] was necessarie: but that they made a large and entire Commentarie vpon all their Scriptures, and deliuered the same to posteritie, to continue perpetually, is not prooued by the confession of Chemnitius; and the discord which is in the Commentaries [...]. Val. to. 3. d. Trad. pag. 377. Fatendum est raro accidere posse, vt quae sit Docto­rum omnium, &c. de Religione Sententia satis cognoscatur. Machlin. in 1. part. Thom. Quaest. 1. art. 10. [...] 49. E Saepe in varias partes patres & [...]. Bellarm. d. bon. operib. in part. lib. 1. cap. 2. of the Fa­thers (yea of Romists themselues) vpon the Scriptures, argu­eth the contrarie.

IESVIT. A

Whereupon S. Augustine argueth, That they that Aug. de vtil. Cred. cap. 14. deliuer the Text of Christs Gospell, must also deliuer the Exposition; affirming, That he would sooner refuse to be­leeue Christ, than admit any interpretation, contrarie to them by whom he was brought to beleeue in Christ. For they that can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sense, why may they not also deliuer a false Text, as receiued B from the Apostles? An argument conuincing, and vn­answerable.

ANSVVER.

Saint Augustine in the place obiected, Lib. d. vtil. Cred. cap. 14. confuteth the Manichees, who condemned Faith, and affirmed, That people ought to credit nothing, but that which is demonstrated by reason Christo cre­dendum esse ne­gant, nifi indubita­ta ratio reddita [...], &c.: And hee argueth against these Heretikes, first, out of some of their owne grounds; for they C were compelled to beleeue something in their Religion, vpon report of others, and they required people to giue credit to certaine Narrations, which could not be demonstrated by rea­son onely.

Secondly, This Father prooueth the necessitie of Faith, be­cause without giuing credit to some report, it was impossible to receiue the knowledge of Christ.

Thirdly, Whereas the Manichees required, that men should learne to know Christs word from them: Saint Au­gustine saith, That if he had no better Guides to follow, than Vos autē tam pau­ci, & tam turbulen­ti, & tam noui, [...] dubium est, quin nihil dignum authoritate praefe­ratis. D such new and turbulent Companions, as those Heretikes were, he should sooner persuade himselfe not to beleeue in Christ, than to beleeue vpon their bare report, or to receiue this Faith from any other, than from those by which he first beleeued.

But Saint Augustine in this place treateth not of the sense of the Scripture, neither doth he say absolutely, that he would sooner refuse to beleeue Christ, than to admit any interpretati­on contrarie to them by whom he was brought to beleeue in E Christ: but he speaketh comparatiuely, and according to hu­mane reason, hee should more easily be persuaded to beleeue nothing, than forsaking the authoritie and testimonie of his first Teachers, yeeld credit to these men, vpon their Hereticall grounds.

[Page 123] It is cleare, that Saint Augustine did not alwayes tye him­selfe, A to the same exposition of Scripture, which those that were before him had deliuered. For in the questions of Grace and Free-will, he found out many expositions, by searching the Scriptures, which both himselfe, and other men, before him were ignorant of, vntill the heresie of Pelagius arose Aug. d. praed. sanct. c. 14.: and in his worke, De Doctrina Christiana Lib. 1. c. 36., he makes twofold charitie, the modell of expounding Scripture, and not the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall Teachers, whom hee oftentimes expoundeth with mitigation, or reiecteth with modestie Epist. 111. & Epist. 112., and hee is most constant in aduancing the authoritie of Scripture, before any B Ecclesiasticall authoritie whatsoeuer Aug. c. Cresc. 2. c. 31. &c. Faust. Ma­nich. l. 11. c. 5. & d. Ciu. Dei. l. 11. c. 3. & l. 14. c. 7..

IESVIT.

For they that can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sence; Why may they not also deliuer a false Text, as recei­ued from the Apostles? An argument conuincing and vn­answerable. C

ANSWER.

The Iesuit imagineth that this Argument is inuincible. But let not him that girdeth on his harnesse boast himselfe, as hee that putteth it off, 1. Kings 20. 11. And Sauls brags, That God had deliuered Dauid into his hand, prooued vaine: 1. Sam. 23. 14. and 24. 5. The Argument reduced to forme, will discouer its owne weakenesse: If the Text of the Scripture may [...] easily bee corrupted as the sence; then all they which can deliuer by vniforme Tradition, a false sence, may also deliuer a false Text. But D the Text of the Scripture may as easily bee corrupted, as the sence. Ergo: All they which can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sence, may also deliuer a false Text.

The assumption of this Syllogisme (which although it were concealed by the Paralogist, yet it must bee added, to make the Argument perfect) is apparantly false, and the contrary is true. The Text of the Scripture cannot so easily bee corrup­ted Aug. Ep. 48. Sal­mer. Tom. 1. Pro­leg. 1. as the sence; and therefore it is not necessarie, that they which following humane Tradition, or their owne inuention, may deliuer a false sence, shall likewise deliuer a false Text. E

First, the Text of the Scripture is contained in Records, and Bookes, which are dispersed throughout the whole Chri­stian world, and preserued in all Churches, and the Coppies and Transcripts of them are innumerable. Tradition is in the brest [Page 124] of a few, and authentically (as Papals affirme) in the brest of A the Pope, and his Church onely [...]. d. verb. Dei l. 4. c. 9. [...] [...] Apostolicas Traditiones..

Secondly, when God Almightie would haue the knowledge and memorie of things to bee perpetuall, he commanded that they should bee committed to writing Aug. sup. Psal. 144. [...] genera­tio vadit & genera­tio manet, & [...] se­cula [...] mor­talibus Scriptura Dei manere debu­it, & quodda Chy­rographū Dei quod omnes [...] legerent, & viā pro­missionis eius tene­rent. Chrys. in Mat. Hom. 1. Postquam omnis populus Iudeorum, in [...] ima delapsus est, necessario inde litetae dantur & tabulae, & ea quae per has administratur admonitio. Et hoc non tantum veteris Testamenti sanctis sed etiam noui accedisse perspicimus.: Exod. 17. 14. and 34. 27. Deut. 31. 19. And although the law of nature was ingrauen in mans heart, and might haue beene preserued for euer, by vniforme succession; yet God himselfe wrote the B same in Tables: Deut. 10.4. and inspired Moses to write it in Bookes: Exod 20. Deut. 5. And although the Precepts of the Law of Nature were more firmely fixed in mans heart, Aug. sup. Psal. 57. Manu formatoris nostri, ipsa veritas in cordibus nostris scripsit Tertul. d. cor. [...]. c. 6. Chrys. in Ioh. Hom. 13. [...]. Epist. 66. Aug. confefl. l. 2. c. 4. Id. sup. serm. Dom. in mont. l. 2. c. 9 Hier. ad Algas. q. 8. C and the Tradition thereof was more generally diffused than any positiue Tradition can bee: yet in processe of time, many parts thereof were corrupted, both in regard of knowledge and practise.

Thirdly, experience of all ages testifieth, that the Text of the Scripture hath beene preserued inuiolable, euen among Iewes and Heretickes: whereas the sence of the Scripture, made knowne by Tradition onely, is forgotten in part [...]. d. ver. Relig. l. 1. c. 10. p. 38. Quae [...] voce ab Apostolis tradebā ­tur, eadem si non omnia, saltem non­nulla per maiorum nostrorum, & supe­riorum Ecclesiarum manus, & concilio­rum approbationes, ad nos [...] existimandum est., and they which disagree about the sence, and some parcels of the Canon of the Scripture, are at one, concerning the verie letter of the Text. For although there were some, which in antient time reiected the Epistle of S t. Iames, and the latter of S t. Peters, &c. yet the literall Text of these Scriptures, was faithfully pre­serued D alwayes in the Church.

f [...]. [...]. 73. [...] d. Dog­mat. E Eccles. l. 4. p. 5. c. 6 Sciendum est, quod multifariam tacitè aliquid in Scripturis sacris inuenitur. Primum cum illud nec expresse in Scripturis sacris significatur, nec adeo euidenter pendet ex illis, vt ipsis admissis cogatur quisquam non dissentire sed tamen necessitate [...] consequitur ex illis secundum Traditionem vniuersalis Ecclesiae intellectis, aut secundum antiquam Christianorum Scholam interpretatis, qualis est haec sententia [...] personae pater filius & [...] sanctus sunt vnus Deus, buius generis sunt omnes articuli fidei contra Haereticos [...] in symbolo [...], & in symbolo quod [...]. Fourthly, whereas the Iesuite compareth vnanimous Tradi­tion of the sence of Scripture, with the written letter and Text of the Scripture; vnlesse he equiuocate in the name, ter­ming that Tradition which is collected from the Scripture, [...]. Hist. Eccles. l. 2. c. 23. [...], &c. such vniforme Tradition as he boasteth of, is verie rare: for it [Page 125] must be such, as in all ages, and in all Orthodoxall Churches, A hath beene the same. Now the most vndoubted and vniforme Tradition of all other, is, concerning the number and integri­tie of the Bookes of holy Scripture; and yet in this, difference hath beene betweene one Church and another Euseb. Hist. Ec­cles. l. 2. c. 23. & l. 3. c. 3. & 22., and the later Romane Church, disagreeth with the antient Greg. Mor. l. 19. c. 17. De qua re non inordinate facimus, si ex libris licer non Canonicis ( Machabeorum) sed tamen ad edificationem plebis editis, testimonium proferamus., the one deny­ing Concil. [...]. sess. 4. Decret. 1. Receptio & numerario lib. sacr. vet. & No. Test., and the other affirming d, the bookes of Macchabees to be Canonicall.

The Articles also of the late Popish Creed, compiled by B Pope Pius the fourth Bulla Pij. 4. p. 294. [...] vi­ta Pij4 p. 384, &c. Profiteor septem esse vere & pro­prie Sacramenta nouae legis, à Iesu Christo Domino nostro instituta, &c. Omnia & singula quae de peccato o­riginali, & de iusti­ficatione in [...] sy­nodo Tridentino, &c. Profiteor in missa offerri Deo verum, proprium, & propitiatoriū [...] pro viuis & defunctis, &c. Fieri conuersionem totius substantiae panis in corpus, & totius substantiae vini in sanguinem, &c. Fateor etiam sub [...] specie, &c. Sanctos inuocandos esse, eorum reliquias venerandas, &c. Imagines Christi ac Dei parae, &c. habendas, & debitum honorem ac venerationem impartiendam, &c. Rom. Ecclesiam omnium Ecclesiarum ma­trem ac Magistram agnosco. Romanoque pontifici, &c. Hanc Catholicam fidem extra quam nemo saluus esse [...], &c., are not agreeable to the antient Tradi­tion of the Catholike Church, or to the Tradition of the el­der Romane Church it selfe: and among sundrie other matters in question betwixt vs, this Iesuit is not able to shew, by an vni­forme Tradition of all ages, that the place of Saint Paul, 1. Cor. 3. 12. is vnderstood of Popish Purgatorie; or Math. 16. 19. Iohn 20.23. of Iubilees and Indulgences; or the place of Acts 10. 13. Rise Peter, and kill, of murthering Princes, or of the temporall dominion of the Pope Sentent. Card. Baron. sup. excom. venetorum.. C

b Gretsar. Def. Bellarm. d. verb. Dei pag. 1713. Regula non dicit id esse Traditionem Apostolicam quod vniuersa Ecclesia semper & omni tempore credidit, sed quod tota Ecclesia (Papa cum Concilio vel sine Concilio. Colloq. Ratisbon. p. 35.) credit & amplectitur in presenti. If the Papists would impose no other sence vpon the Scrip­ture, than such as is confirmed by vniforme Tradition, the dif­ference betweene them and vs would easily bee composed: but D these men euerie day hatch nouell expositions, and when they are hunted out of one, they flie to another. They glorie of an­tiquitie, succession, vniforme Tradition, and cry Victoria, Inuin­cible, Vnanswerable, before the combate is finished: but they are compelled to forge Authours, to impose false expositions vp­on the Texts of Fathers, sometimes to abridge, sometimes to inlarge the Tomes of Councells, and to purge and corrade Ec­clesiasticall writers, old and new: Sixt. [...]. Biblioth. Ep. Dedi­cat. ad Piū. 5. Dein­de expurgari & e­maculari curasti omnia Catholicorū Scriptorum, ac precipue veterum patrum, scripta, Haereti corum nostrae aetatis foecibus contaminata, & venenis [...]. and yet being vnable to pre­uaile by all the former, they are forced in many cases, to presse the bare authoritie of the Pope, and his adheres, to warrant their Tradition. E

IESVITS 3 d. Argument. A

My third proofe I ground vpon a principle most cer­taine, In the summe of the Conference be­fore his Maiestie. pa. [...]. and set downe by your most gratious Maiestie, That the Roman Church was once the Mother Church, and con­sequently the One, Holy, Catholicke, and Apostolicke Church, all other Churches being her daughters: and that she is not to be forsaken, further than it can be prooued that she departed from her selfe, that is, from the Mother and originall Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles. B

ANSWER.

This principle whereupon you ground your third Argu­ment, is neither true in it selfe, nor yet confessed by his excel­lent Maiestie, in the place whereunto you referre vs Summe Con­fer. at Hampton Court, Ianuar. 14. 1603. pag. 75. This being his constant resolution, That no Church ought fur­ther to seperate it selfe from the Church of Rome, either in Doctrine or Ceremonie, than she had departed from herselfe when she was in her flou­rishing and best estate, and from Christ her Lord & Head.. His Ma­iestie affirmeth, That wee ought not to depart from the Church of Rome in Doctrine or Ceremonie, further than she had departed from her selfe, in her best estate, and from Christ her head. This sen­tence of our most religious King is consequent vpon S. Pauls C doctrine, Rom. 12. 18. & Rom. 14. 13. and the same is conso­nant to Charitie and Reason Aug. d. Bapt. c. Donat. li. 6. ca. 44. Ipsi Gentiles si quid diuinum & rectum, &c. Orig sup. Exod. Hom. 11. Basil. Hexam. Hom. 5. Clem. Alexand. Strom. li. 1., and argueth a mind desirous of Concord and Peace, and averse from vnnecessarie Innouations. And as this moderation is commendable in all men, so it is most agreeable to him that is a Father of peace, whose word is Beati Pacifici Symb. Othonis Imp. pax cum hominibus cum vitijs bellum.. But whereas you incroach vpon his Maiesties speech, adding a glosse which is not warranted by the Text, and infer a conclusion which the premises affoord not, you are here­in iniurious, both to the Author you alleage, and to the Truth. D

The Roman was neuer, by diuine institution There is dif­ference betweene the Mother-church, which fignifieth a Church, out of whose wombe all other Churches is­sue. and a Mother-Church, which (as Turtullian calleth Matrices Ecclesias) importeth not fingularitie of One, Holy, &c. but only Veritie and Prioritie before others, whereof it was a Mother., the Mother Church, in regard of all Christians, neither Vniuersall, in respect of an absolute command and iurisdiction ouer all particular Churches, as is challenged by the Canon, Dist. 12. c. 1. Non decet, &c. Gratian. Dist. 12. ca. 1. Non decet à capite E membra discedere, sed iuxta sacrae Scripturae testimonium, omnia membra caput sequantur. Nulli vero dubium est, quod Apostolica Ecclesia mater est omnium Ecclesiarum, à cuius vos regulis nullatenus conuenit deuiare, & sicut Dei filius venit facere voluntatem patris, sic & vos voluntatem vestrae impleatis matris, quae est Ec­clesia, cuius caput (vt praedictum est) Romana existit Ecclesia.

But it was once a Mother Church, as the Seas of Patriarches [Page 127] are stiled Mother-Churches, or a Mother-Church respectiue­ly A to such people and nations as were conuerted by her prea­ching, and other Churches were stiled with that title as well as the Roman. Theod. Hist. Eccles. lib. 5. cap. 9. Matris omnium [...] Hieroso­lomitanae, reueren­distimum, & Dei [...] Cy­rillum Episcopum esse vobis signifi­camus. Theoderet speaking of the Church of Hierusalem, saith, [...]. We make knowne vnto you, that the most reuerend and godly Cyrill is made Bishop of Hie­rusalem, which is the Mother of all Churches.

The Roman Church, once a Metropolitan, or patriarchall Mother Church, since the daies of Hildebrand, is suspected to be the Mother spoken of, Apoc. 17. 5. and some of your B owne part haue said, that in these latter times Sarisbur. Poli­crat. li. 6. ca. 24., Nontam se ma­trem exhibet quam Noueream, she behaueth her selfe more like a stepdame than a naturall mother, her brests haue beene verie drie for sundrie ages past Espenc. Di­gres. in 1. Timoth. li. 1. ca. 11. Fides ex di­uini verbi auditu. Ro. 10. Vbi ergo id nec legitur nec au­ditur, fidem peri­re, ac labefactari necesse est, [...] ho­die [...] dolor, om­nib' fere locis cer­nimus, vt ad tem­pora propinquare videamur de quib' Dominus: putas fi­lius hominis veniens, fidem inueniet super terram. August. tr. 3. in ep. Ioh. Est mater Ecclesia & vbera eius duo testamenta Scripturarum diuinarum, &c. and she depriued her children of a principall portion of the food of life, and in steed of milke deliuered them water mixt with chaulke Iren. li. 3. ca. 19. [...]. d. fid. Orthod. c. Arian. c. 1. Vt Gyp­sum aqua permixtum lac colore mentitur, ita per verisimilem confessionem Traditio inimica suggeritur.: Her publicke rea­dings and seruice were in an vnknowne tongue: the holy Scriptures were closed vp, that people might not cast their eies vpon them: fabulous legends were read and preached Espenceus in 2. Timoth. 4. digr. 21. pa. 150. 151. & sup. 1. Tim. digress. lib. 1. ca. 11. Maiores nostri, tanta licet quanta nos erga sanctos deuotione, iustum tamen non putarunt, tot sanctorum gestarecitari, vt legi non pos­sint sacra vtriusquè Testam. volumina. Facilius Augiae Stabulum quam talibus fabellis, &c. Ludouic. Viues. lib. 2. d. corrupt. artium. in fine. & Ib. li. 5. in steed of Gods word: and hereby it came to passe, as some C of their owne Authors Nauar. Enchir. ca. 11. n. 6. In vniuersa Repub. Christiana, tanta est circa haec [...] dia, vt multos passim inuenias, nihil magis in particulari, explicite de hijs rebus credere, quam D Ethnicum quendam Philosophum, sola vnius Dei naturali cognitione [...]. say, That the greater number of people vnderstood no more concerning God, and things diuine, than Infidels or Heathen people.

IESVIT.

But she cannot be prooued to haue changed her Do­ctrine, since the Apostles, by any monuments of Historie or Antiquitie: yea the contrarie in my iudgement may be most euidently prooued, in this sort. E

ANSVVER.

If by monuments of Historie and Antiquitie, be vnderstood Human or Ecclesiasticall Monuments, it is inconsequent to in­ferre, that the present Roman Church hath not changed her [Page 128] doctrine since the Apostles, although this could not be de­monstrated A by monuments of Historie, &c. for there remai­neth a more firme and demonstratiue Argument to prooue this, to wit, the holy Scripture: and if the present doctrine of the Roman Church disagree with the Scripture, then it is changed from that which it was antiently. The rule by which we must trie doctrines is the word of God, and not humane Historie [...]. d. vnit. Eccles. cap. 3. Non audiamus hec dico, haec dicis, sed audi­am' haec dicit Do­min'. Sunt certi li­bri dominici quorū authoritati vtriquè consentimus, vtri (que) credimus, vtriquè seruimus, ibi quae­ramus Ecclesiam, ibi discutiam' cau­sam nostram. Ibid. Auserantur illa de medio, quae aduer­sus nos inuicem, nō ex diuinis Cano­nicis libris, sed ali­unde recitam'. No­lo humanis docu­mentis, sed diuinis oraculis, Ecclesiam demonstrari. Ib. ca. 16. Ecclesiam suam demonstrent, si pos­sunt non in sermo­nibus & rumoribus Afrorum, non in concilijs Episcopo­rum suorum, &c. sed in praescripto legis, &c. in ipsius Pastoris vocib', &c. hoc est in omnibus Canonicis sancto­rum librorum au­thoritatibus., and the word of God is true, and abideth for euer, whereas hu­mane Historie is fallible, contingent, and corruptible. 1. It is not absolutely necessarie that humane Histories of all mat­ters should be composed, and the world continued many B ages without any written Historie. Secondly, When the same are written, they cause onely humane Faith. Canus. loc. Theolog. li. 11. ca. 4. Praetèr Authores sacros, nullus Historicus certus esse potest, &c. Horant. loc. lib. 5. cap. 3. Gillius d. Deo & sacr. Doctr. li. 1. tr. 7. ca. 15. August. d. Ciuit. Dei li. 18. ca. 38. & 40. & li. 21. ca. 6. Thirdly, they may totally perish, and be suppressed, or corrupted by the enemies of Truth. Read a late Treatise touching the visibilitie of the [...], Sect. 15. pa. 68.69. how Papists burned the workes of [...] and others which were opposite to them. Fourthly, Historie may be repugnant to Historie, and that which is affirmed by some, may be contra­dicted or contrauerted by others The Storie of Pope [...] affirmed at least by thirtie Popish Historians, and other Doctors, and of late stifly opposed by other Papals, Vid. Ioan. Wolph memorabil. An. Dom. 854. [...]. loc. [...]. 5. d. Ecclesia sect. 197. And by the Storie, touching Pope [...], who is affirmed to haue beene an Hereticke by antient Historie, and by many Papals, yet the same is stifly contradicted by Modernes, Albertus Pighius, Bellar­mine, Baronius, Andradius, &c.: and the largenesse and difficultie of the Monuments of Antiquitie may be such, as that few people can be able to read and examine them: and if they which read and compare them be opposite in iudgement each to other, the greater part of people shall be perplexed, C and cannot know how to resolue themselues. Our Aduersaries teach vs, That the principall Monuments of Antiquitie, to wit, the ancient Councels, haue not beene faithfully preserued Bellarm. d. Concil. li. 1. ca. 2. Libri ipsi [...] conser­uati E sunt, & multis vitijs scatent, &c. Espenc. sup. 1. Timoth. Digress li. 1. ca. 11. pag. 223. Argumentum est, concilio­rum acta non vbiquè integra esse.. Many things supposititious, haue beene added to the workes of the Antient, and bastardly Bookes and Sentences passe vn­der the titles of Fathers. Our Aduersaries being a party whose doctrine is to be examined (according to their owne challenge) by Monuments of Antiquitie, haue presumed to correct, purge, and alter such Records. Lastly, when the testimonie of Histo­rians repugnant to their present Tenet, is produced against Pa­pals, D they despise and reiect them, to wit, Eusebius Paramo. d. Orig. Inquisit. lib. 3. d. pontif. author. in Temporal. q. 1. Opi­nio. 1. num. 95. pag. 436. Nec curandum est de opinione & historia Eusebij, cum ab Ecclesia sit reprobara vt inquit Gelasius. d. 15. c. Sancta Romana vel eo quià Arrianus & Arrianorum protector fuit, &c., Socrates, Sozomene, &c. Baronius, a new vpstart, censureth all Historians [...]. Anal. tom. 1. praefat. Idem. Anno 395. n. 41. & anno 400. n. 42. Idem. Anno 774. n. 10.12.13. [...]. Anno 996. n. 54. Idem. An. 1048. num. 1.. Pighius Bannes. 22. quest. 1. ar. 10. pa. 58. Et certè [...] est quod post 900. [...] Albertus Pighius inue­nerit testes illos falsarios [...]., after one thousand yeares, controls the testimonie [Page 129] of generall Councels, and it is a rule among them, that the anti­ent A Fathers (then much lesse Histories) are not to be [...] any [...], than they [...] the keyes and [...] of the [...] Church [...]. d. [...]. [...] pag. 273. [...]. Resp. [...]. [...]. 5. pag. 140. Nequè enim patres censentur, cum [...], quod ab Ecclesia [...] acceperunt, vel scribunt, vel docent. [...]. Mus. Comment. Rom. c. 14. Ego. vt [...], plus vni [...] crederem, in hijs quae [...] tangunt, quam mille [...], [...], Gregorijs, &c. pa. 606. [...]. Prier. li. d. Mod. Inquir. Reg. 6. Dimitte Doctores doctores esse, Ecclesiam [...] necesse est: illi possunt errare Ecclesia non potest errare..

IESVIT. B

The Doctrines that were for diuers ages vniuersally receiued in the Christian Church, and no time of their be­ginning is assigneable, must be Doctrines vnchanged com­ming from the Apostles.

ANSVVER.

This Proposition may hold in prime and essentiall Articles of Doctrine, but not generally in all Doctrines: and some learned C Papists hold, that it is possible for the visible Church of one age to erre or be deceiued, by a blamelesse and inuincible igno­rance, in points of Doctrine, the expresse knowledge whereof is not necessarie to Saluation [...]. Dia­log. pa. 1. lib. 4. ca. 9. & lib. 5. cap. 7. [...]. Arms. [...]. q. 1. p. 9. [...]. [...]. pent. fid. vol. 1. dub. 23. c. 2. [...]. 4..

IESVIT.

But it is most cleere, and confessed by the Protestants, Doct. [...], Fulke, [...], [...], Bale, [...], [...], [...] & others, Whita­ker Powell, Bucan. Field, and others. whose testimonie (plentifull in this behalfe, if need require) D shall be brought. First, that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse, haue beene vniuersally receiued for many ages, a thousand yeares agoe at least, euer since Boniface the third.

ANSWER.

It is neither cleere in it selfe, nor yet confessed by Prote­stants, that the Doctrines of the Roman Church, which Pro­testants refuse, haue been vniuersally receiued for 1000 yeres E at least, &c. The article of the Popes Supremacie, and of Purga­torie, Adoration of Images, forbidding married Priests to liue with their wiues, were euer opposed and reiected by the Greek Church. The Doctrine of the Trident Councell concerning [Page 130] the Canon of the holy Scriptures [...] praef. in Math. q. 19. Nos [...], quare potius [...] effet, Marco & [...]; [...] & [...], quam libro [...] & [...], qui non [...] in Canone, cum non appareat ali­qua ratio maior de hoc quam de illo: sed solum sequimur Ecclesiam, quia ip­sa posuit libros [...] in Canone: librum autē Iudith & To­biae extra Canonē. (& postea:) Ec­clesia vniuersalis, &c. Hoc conformi­ter & vniformit [...]. and the preheminence of A the vulgar Translation, before the Hebrew and Greeke Text, was not vniuersally [...] for a thousand yeeres. The tem­poral authoritie of the Pope, the merit of Condignitie, publicke seruice in an vnknowne language, Iubilees, and Popes pardons, Communion in one kind, Transubstantiation, Blessing or bap­tising of Bells [...]. Rom. l. 2. Printed at [...], 1520. [...] debet [...] antequam [...] in campani­li: paranda sunt ideo vas aquae be­nedicendae, asperso­rium vas cum sale, lintea munda, oleū sanctum, sanctum Chrysma, Thymia­ma, thus [...] Thuribulum cum igne: Pontifex & Diaconus, &c. sint in suis vestimentis, precibus peractis pontifex lauat campanam cum dicta aqua & cum pol­lice D dextra manus facit crucem supra campanam ab extra cum oleo infirmorum & intus cum Chrysmate, & pro­fert interim haec verba; [...] & consecretur (Domine) signum istud in nomine Patris & Filij & Spiritus sancti. In honorem sancti talis, pax tibi, &c., &c. were not generally receiued in the Church vniuersall, for a thousand yeeres at least: And a great number of Beleeuers, which in this West part of the world, haue al­wayes denied and resisted these Articles; and among other op­ponents, there were a people, called Waldenses, Leonistae, pauperes B de Lugduno, &c. many in number, and largely diffused through diuers Countries, who denied the foresaid Popish Articles, and whose Doctrine, in the most points, was consonant to that which reformed Churches doe now professe. Reinerius, Reiner. cont. Haeret. c. 4. Inter omnes sectas quae adhuc sunt vel fuerunt, non fuisse [...]. Ecclesiae, quam [...], idque tribus de causis. Prima est [...] est diu­turnior, aliqui enim dicunt quod durauerit à temporibus Syluestri, aliqui à tempore Apostolorum. Se [...], quia generalior, fere enim nulla est terra in qua haec secta non sit. Tertia, quia cum omnes aliae sectae immanitate blasphemiarum in Deum, audientibus horrorem inducant, haec scilicet Leonistarum, magnam habet speciem pietatis, eo quod coram hominibus iuste viuant, & benè omnia de Deo [...], & omnes Articulos quī in sym­bolo continentur, solum modo Romanam Ecclesiam blasphemant, & Clerum, cui multitudo Laicorum fa cilis est ad credendum. [...]. Hist. Franc. l. 1. p. 7. Edit. an. 1581. A Waldensibus & eorum in Aquitania ac vicina regione successoribus qui ab Albio, [...] in septimania vrbe primaria Albigenses dicti sunt. Hi inuitis Principibus Christianis omnibus, Cirea annum 1100. & temporibus subsequentibus, doctrinam suam ab ea quam hodie pro­testantes amplectuntur [...] differentem, non per Galliam [...] totam, sed etiam per omnes [...] Europae [...] diffeminarunt. Nam Galli, [...], Angli, Scoti, Itali, Germani, Bohemi, Saxones, Poloni, Lithuani, & gentes E aliae, cam ad hunc diem pertinaciter defenderunt. an Inquisitour of the Church of Rome, liuing about the yeere one thousand two hundred fiftie foure, in a Booke Printed at Ingolstade, writeth in this manner of the Waldenses, which hee calleth Leonists: Among all Sects, which are or haue formerly beene, none is more pernicious to the Church than that of the Leonists. First, because it continued longer than any other, for some say it hath C lasted euer since Pope Siluester, others say euer since the Apostles. Se­condly, because no Sect is more generall than this, for there is scarce any countrey, in which it is not found. Thirdly, whereas other Sects de­terre men with their horrible blasphemies, this Sect of the Leonists ma­keth a great shew of godlinesse, because they liue righteously before men, and beleeue all things rightly touching God, and concerning all other Articles of the Ceed: onely they blaspheme the Romane Church and Clergie, in which thing the Laitie is forward to giue credit vnto them.

IESVIT.

Secondly, That Protestants cannot tell the time when A the Church of Rome began to change and deuiate from the Apostolicall Doctrine, deliuered by succession: Ergo, the Roman Church neuer changed her Faith.

ANSWER.

If the Antecedent were true, yet it followeth not, Ergo the B same Roman Church neuer changed her Faith: For although we cannot tell the time when the progenitors of Abraham first began to change and deuiate from the Doctrine of Noah, and Sem; yet it is certaine, that they had changed their Religi­on Ambros. lib. 2. cap. 3. & 7. d. Abra­ham. [...]. d. Ci­uit. Dei, lib. 16. c. 12. Cedrenus compend. Histor. Genebrard. Chronol. lib. 1. An. 1949. Andr. Masius, sup. Ios. 24. [...]. li. [...]. [...]. Serm. 2. d. Poenit. Clement. Re­cognit. lib. 1., Iosh. 24. 2. And were not the Sodomites transgressors of the Law of Nature, because the first beginning of their transgression cannot be knowne? How many wicked Cu­stomes haue beene common in the World, whose authors and first beginners were vnknowne to Posteritie? The time is not C knowne, when the late Iewish Church did first change and cor­rupt the sense of the Morall Law, and brought in the Traditi­ons condemned by our Sauiour; and yet they had corrupted and changed the same. Matth. 5. & 6. & 7. & 15. & 19. & 23.

If a Tenant haue by himselfe and his predecessors long held an House, which is now in decay, and readie to drop downe; the Landlord, by this Law of the Iesuits, Ergo, shall neuer compell the Tenant to make reparation, vnlesse he be able to demonstrate to the Tenant, in what yeere and moneth euerie D Wall and Rafter began to decay. A Physician shall not purge a malignant humor out of a diseased bodie, vnlesse hee or his Patient be able to name the time and manner of that misdiet, which bred the first seed of this distemper.

IESVIT.

So that her Doctrines are to be receiued as Apostoli­call, supposing the Maior of this Argument be true, That E Doctrines vniuersally receiued, whose beginning is not knowne, are to be beleeued as Apostolicall: which is a August. lib. 4. d. Bap. contra Donat. c. 6. & 24. lib. 5. cap. 23. [...]. Defence, pag. 351, 352. Principle set downe by Saint Augustine, allowed by Doctor Whitgift, late Archbishop of Canturburie, who in [Page 132] his Bookes written by publike authoritie against Puritans, A citing diuerse Protestants, as concurring in opinion with him, saith, Whatsoeuer Opinions are not knowne to haue begun since the Apostles times, the same are not new, or secundarie, but receiued their originall from the Apostles. But because this Principle of Christian Di­uinitie brings in ( as M. Cartwright speaketh) all Poperie, The Ward. of M. Cartwright alled­ged, ibid. pag. 352. in the iudgement of all men; I will further demonstrate the same, though of it selfe cleare enough. B

ANSWER.

If the Maior of this Argument were graunted, to wit, Doctrines vniuersally receiued, whose beginning is not knowne, are to be [...] as Apostolicall; yet the inference is false, because the Romane Doctrines opposed by vs, were neuer vniuersally re­ceiued, but by many eyther not heard of, or reiected and contradicted.

Neyther is the former Principle sufficiently prooued out C of S. Augustine: First, because hee speaketh in all the places obiected, of Customes August. d. Bapt. c. Don. lib. 5. cap. 23. Apostoli autem ni­hil quidem exinde preceperunt, sed consuetudo illa quae opponebatur Cy­priano, ab eorum Traditione exordi­um sumpsisse cre­denda est, sicut multa quae vniuer­sa tenet Ecclesia, & ob hoc, ab A­postolis praecepta bene creduntur, quanquam scripta non inueniantur. At enim [...] est de Haereticis, &c. and matters of Fact and Practise, the right and Doctrine whereof is found in holy Scripture. Se­condly, the Iesuit conueyeth into his Proposition certaine words (to wit, Doctrines vniuersally receiued, &c.) which are not found in S. Augustine. And this Father did neuer allow, that the vniuersall Church should beleeue any thing, as Doctrine of Faith, which was not contained expressely, or deriuatiuely, in holy Scripture August. Epist. 142. Initium obedientiae est quid praecipiatur velle cognoscere, & pars est obsequij didicisse quid facias, Scito itaque in Scrip­turis Diuinis, per quas solas potes plenam intelligere Dei voluntatem prohiberi quaedam, praecipi quaedam, concedi aliqua, nonnulla suaderi. Prohibentur mala, [...] bona, conceduntur media, perfecta suaden­tur.: And in the same bookes, out of which D these Obiections are collected, he confuteth rebaptising, by Scripture, and confirmeth the lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme by Scripture Lib. 4. cap. 24. d. Bapt. c. Donatist..

So that his meaning is when matters being in common vse, and practise, are questioned, the right and lawfulnesse hath E warrant from the Scripture, although no especiall example be found in the written Bookes of the Apostles, of such practise, yet the generall custome and vse of the vniuersall Church in all Ages, argueth, that such practise receiued it beginning from [Page 133] the Apostles. For example: That the Apostles baptised In­fants, A is not particularly reported in their Writings; but suffi­cient grounds are found in them to prooue the necessitie, and to warrant the practise thereof. In this, and in all other the like cases, Quod vniuersa tenet Ecclesia, nec [...] institutum, sed semper retentum est, non nisi Authoritate Apostolica, traditum rectissimè creditur August. d. Bapt. c. Don. lib. 4. cap. 24. Idem, Epist. 118. cap. 1. Illa autem quae non [...] B sed tradita custo­dimus, quae quidem toto terrarum orbe obseruantur, dantur intelligi, vel ab [...], vel plenarijs Conci­lijs quorum est in Ecclesia saluberrima Authoritas, commendata atque statuta retineri, sicuti quod Domini Passio, & Resurrectio, & Ascensio in Coelum, & Aduentus de Coelo Spiritus Sancti, Anniuersaria solennitate celebrantur.; That which the vniuersall Church hol­deth, and which was not appointed by Councels, but alwayes obserued, is most rightly beleeued to be none other, than a Tradition of the Apostles.

Lastly, that which is produced out of BB. Whitgift and M. Cartwright, belongeth to the Titles or Names of Ecclesi­asticall Rulers, and to the matter of Ceremonies. Cartwright had a sowre opinion against these, being neuer so antient and inculpable. The most reuerend BB. his Aduersarie answereth out of S. Augustine, Epist. 118. Those things that be not expressed in the Scriptures, and yet by Tradition obserued of the whole Church, C come either from Apostles, or from generall Councels, as the obseruing of Easter, the celebration of the day of Ascension, &c. The Bishop disputeth of adiaphorous Ceremonies, and Titles of Ecclesia­sticall persons, no wayes blameable, but because they are not expressely found in Scripture: and concerning such things, he saith, That because their originall cannot be found out, it is to be sup­posed (it is probable) they haue their beginning from the Apostles. But hee speaketh not in this manner, touching dogmaticall points, and Articles of Faith: Therefore our Aduersarie per­uerteth D his words and meaning.

IESVIT.

The Spirit of Christ, or Christ by his Spirit, being still with the Church, cannot permit Errors in Faith so to creepe into the Church, as they grow irreformable euen by the Principles of Christianitie. But if Errors could so creepe into the Church, as their beginning could not be knowne since the Apostles, and neuer be espyed till they be vniuer­sally E receiued, Errors could so creepe into the Church, and preuaile, that by the Principles of Christianitie they are irreformable. This I prooue, because Errors are irrefor­mable [Page 134] by the Principles of Christianitie, when whosoeuer A vndertakes to reforme them by the Principles of Christiani­tie, is to be condemned as an Heretike. But he that will vn­dertake to reforme Doctrines vniuersally receiued by the Church, opposeth against the whole Church, and therefore is by the most receiued Principle of Christianitie, by Christs owne direct Precept, to be accounted as an Heathen and Publican. And as S. Augustine saith, to dispute against the Matth. 18. v. 17. August. Epist. 118. whole Church, is most insolent madnesse, specially when the B Doctrine is antient, without any knowne beginning, as are the supposed erronious Customes and Doctrines of the Ro­mane Church: for then the vndertaking Reformer must striue against, not onely the whole present Church, but also the whole streame of the visible Church, time out of mind, since the Apostles. Et quis ad haec Idoneus? Who is able to begin a new course of Christianitie, and to ouerthrow that Doctrine which is vniuersally receiued, and cannot be C prooued by any Tradition of Ancestors to be otherwise plan­ted in the World, but by the Apostles themselues, through the efficacie of innumerable Miracles? Wherefore these Do­ctrines, if they be Errors which by the Principles of Chri­stianitie no man ought to goe about to reforme, and seeing it is impossible that there should be any such Errors, we must acknowledge that Principle of S. Augustine as most cer­taine, That Doctrines receiued vniuersally in the D Church, without any knowne beginning, are truly and verily Apostolicall. And of this kind are the Roman, from which Protestants are gone.

ANSWER.

The Point which you labour to prooue, is, That Doctrines vniuersally receiued, whose beginning is not reported by Monuments of Historie and Antiquitie, are Apostolicall. You haue taken that as granted, and presupposed, which we denie, to wit, That your Po­pish Doctrine was for a thousand yeeres (at least) vniuersally receiued. E But this is a begging of the Question, and a false supposition: Wherefore I might, according to the rules of Disputation, passe by the other part of your Argument. But to cleare all things more exactly, I will ex abundanti answer that which followeth.

[Page 135] Your disputation about this part of the question, being re­solued A into the seuerall Arguments and parts, may bee thus conceiued.

No errours irreformable can be in the Church.

All errours vniuersally receiued, without a knowne begin­ning, are irreformeable. Ergo:

No errours vniuersally receiued, without a knowne beginning, can be in the Church. B

The Maior is confirmed by an Argument, taken from the continuall presence of Christ, by his Spirit, to the vniuersall Church, for wheresoeuer Christ is perpetually present, and assistant by his holy Spirit, there it is impossible that irreforme­able errours should preuaile.

I answere: No errours great or lesse, absolutely irreforme­able, can bee in the Church, as it signifieth the sounder and better part thereof: but errours irreformeable Ex Hypothesi, C that is, presupposing the ignorance and malice of some ouerru­ling Prelates, may preuaile in the Hierarchicall Church, which is vulgarly reputed, the vniuersall Church; for such a Church may be the seate of Antichrist, and whiles he reigneth, errours may be incureable, Ierem. 51. 9. Apoc. 17. 5. Neither doth the presence of Christ and of his Spirit, deliuer the malig­nant part of the Church from irreformeable errours, but one­ly the liuing members of his mysticall Bodie, which are actua­ted, and mooued by influence of sauing Grace, Iohn 8. 31, 32. Rom. 1. 28. 2. Thes. 2. 11. Iohn 12. 40.

The Assumption, to wit, All errours vniuersally receiued, D without a knowne beginning, are irreformeable, is denied. For although the errours of the Pharisees were vniuersally recei­ued, according to the vniuersalitie of the state of the Church in those dayes, without such a knowne beginning, as Papists require vs to exhibite, concerning their errours; yet the same were reformeable by the word of Christ, and by the doctrine of the Prophets, in all such as receiued the loue of the Truth, that they might be saued.

But the Iesuite prooueth his Assumption by this reason. E

All errours are irreformeable, when they which seeke to reforme them, are Heretickes by the Principles of Christi­anitie.

[Page 136] But all that seeke to reforme errours vniuersally receiued, A whose beginning is not knowne, are heretickes by the principles of Christianitie. Ergo:

All errours vniuersally receiued, without a knowne beginning, are irreformeable.

The Minor of this Paralogisme, is denyed: and it is false, That all they which seeke to reforme errours vniuersally recei­ued, are iustly condemned as heretickes, by the principles of Christianitie. And the Argument produced to prooue this B Proposition, is of no force.

Whosoeuer opposeth against the whole Church, is by the most receiued Principle of Christianitie deliuered, Matth. 18. 7. to be accounted as an Heathen or a Publicane; and Saint Augu­stine saith, That to dispute against the whole Church is insolent madnesse.

But whosoeuer seeketh to reforme errours vniuersally recei­ued, whose beginning is not knowne, opposeth against the whole C Church. Ergo:

All they which seeke to reforme errours, &c. are Heretickes, by the Principles of Christiantie.

ANSVVER.

Whosoeuer opposeth against the whole Church, taken as before, for the Church Hierarchicall or representatiue, Occham. Dialog. part. 3. tr. 1. l. 3. c. 9. Lyra sup. Math. 16. Ecclesia non con­sistit in hominibus, ratione potestatis, vel dignitatis Ec­clesiasticae, vel se­cularis, quia multi principes, & summi pontifices, & alij inferiores inuenti sunt apostatasse à fide: propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis, in quibus est notitia vera, & confessio fidei & veritatis. is not by the doctrine of our Sauiour, and Saint Augustine, to be ac­counted D an Heathen or Publicane: but euery one, which oppo­seth against the true Church inordinately, and without iust cause, is onely so to be accounted.

First, there is opposition by way of counsell and aduice, and this maketh no man an Hereticke, as appeareth by Paphnutius, opposing the Councell of Nice Tripart. Hist. l. 2. c. 14. Niceph. Hist. Eccl. l. 8. c. 19. Gra­tian. Dist. 31. ca. Nicen, Synodus..

Secondly, there is opposition by way of reprehension, E and true confutation of errour, by authoritie of the ho­ly Scriptures Athanas. d. Syn. Arim. & Seleuc. pa. 673. Scriptura diuina omnibus Synodis potentior est. Hieron. sup. Galath, c. 1. spiritus sancti [...] est, quae Canonicis literis est prodita, contra quam si quid statuant Concilia nefas duco.: And this also maketh no man an Here­ticke [Page 137] Aquin. 22. q. 38. ar. 1. Chrysoft. sup. Rom. Ho. 22. Quae tui sunt officij, prae­sta, nemini dans ausam seu belli seu dissidij, siue Iude o siue Graeco, si vero alicubi [...] la­befactari videris, ne praeponas con­cordiam veritati: sed generose per­siste admortē vsq, B Cyril. Concil. [...]. [...]. 1. c. 14. Aquin. 22. q. 33. ar. 4. Vbi imminet periculum fidei etiam publice essent [...] à subditis arguendi. Gabr. sup. Can. Missae. lect. 74. Correctione [...], inferiores, superiores [...] non debent, nisi manifeste errarent in fide. Tunc enim si non adessent superiores vindicantes, velnollent, tunc per inferiores possunt puniri, quia Haeresis reddit Hereticum, omni Catholico inferiorem. Francisc. Picus. Mirand. Theorem. 8. [...] Papae ligat omnes fideles ad non dogmatizandum contrarium, nifi per illos & apud illos qui manifestum contra fidem deprehendunt errorem, & scandalum grande fidei suo silentio fieri, si se non opponerent agnoscunt, quod si fieret persecutio sententiatum & paenarum contra eos, sciant [...] esse qui persecutionem patiuntur propter iustitìam. Idem. Theorem. 16. Si pars maior contra diuinas literas contraque ea quae violate nefas est, decernere quicquani vellet reliquis qui pauciores essent contra [...]: numero minori adhaerendū esset quemadmodum accidit in Arimensi Concilio & in Ephesino secundo: [...] simplici potius rustico & in­fanti & anniculae quā & [...] maximo & mille Episcopis credendum, si contra Euangelium isti, illi pro Euan­gelio verba facerent.: because he that in a lawfull manner, propugneth the A faith of the Scriptures, maintaineth the Law and veritie of God, and fulfilleth the Diuine Precept, requiring man to con­tend for the truth: 1. Tim. 6. 11. 2. Tim. 4. 7. And also perfor­meth a worke of charitie, in labouring to conuert people from errour, Iam. 5. 19, 20. Saint Augustines place, Epist. 118. c. 5. ad Ianuar. is vnderstood of outward ceremonies, and adiapho­rous rites Aug. ibid. c. 1. Quae nonscripta sed tradita custodimus, quae quidem toto terrarū or be obseruantur, dantur intelligi yel ab ipsis Apostolis, vel plenarijs Concilijs, quorum est in Ecclesia saluberima Au­thoritas, commendata arque Statuta retineri, sicut quod passio Domini, &c. [...] solennitate celebran­tur, C &c. Totum hoc genus rerum liberas habet obseruationes, &c., in respect of their vse vnblameable, and not of matters of faith; and therefore it appertaineth not to the que­stion in hand.

IESVITS 4 th Argument.

That doctrine, which Tradition hath deliuered, as the doctrine of all Ancestours, without deliuering any Orthodox opposition against it, that is, opposition made by any confessed Catholicke Doctours or Fathers, is doctrine deriued from the Apostles, without change. D

ANSWER.

This Proposition is denied: for new Doctrine may bee brought in, after the decease of the antient Fathers, and be­cause the same was vnheard of in their dayes, they could make no such plaine and direct opposition against it, as that either Historians might take notice thereof, or the maintainers of such Doctrine haue no euasion, by distinctions and sophi­sticall E slights, to elude their Testimonies.

IESVIT. A

But such is the Doctrine of the Roman Church, which Consent and Tradition of Ancestors doth deliuer, and doth not together deliuer, that any confessed Orthodox Father opposed against it.

ANSVVER.

Some Doctrines of the later Roman Church were oppo­sed by the antient Roman Bishops themselues, to wit, Adorati­on B of Images, by Gregorie the Great Greg. [...]. 9. Ep. 9. Eas [...] [...].: Communion in one kind, by Leo the first [...]: Transubstantiation, by Gelasius the first [...] con. Nestor. & Eurich. No definit esse sub­stantia vel natura Panis & [...].: The temporall dominion of Popes and Bishops ouer Princes, by S. Chrysostome, Chrys. super Rom. 13. hom. 23., Optatus Mileuitanus Optatus con. Parmen. lib. 3., and Gregorie the first Greg. lib. 2. ep. 61. Sacerdotes meos tuae manui commissi, &c. [...] ergo quae debui exolui qui & Im­peratori obedientiam praebui & pro Deo quod sensi minime tacui.: The dignitie and title of vniuersall Bishop, by the same Gregorie Idem lib. 6. epist. 30. Ego sidentèr di­co, quià quisquis se vniuersalem Sacerdotem vocar vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua Antechristum praecurrit, quià [...] biendo se caeteris praeponit.: And the Doctrine of Papals, preferring the old Translation before the originall Text Hieron. sup. Nah. c. 1. Aduersus conscientiam meam cogor inter­dum, vulgatae aeditionis consequentiam texere. Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. li. 2. ca. 11.; making Apocriphall bookes Canonicall Hieron. Greg. m. & alij. Occham Dial. pa. 3. li. [...]. 16. [...], liber Indith, Tobiae, Machabeorum, Ecclesiastici, Sapientiae, non sunt recipiendi ad confirmandum aliquid in fide.; prohibiting lay people to read the Scrip­tures Chrys. sup Genes. hom. 29. Ambr. serm. 35 Hieron. epist. ad [...], &c. Cyril. c. [...]. li. 7. Theoph. sup. [...]. 6. Primasius sup. Coloss. 3. Chrys. in [...], quomodò & vobis potissimùm [...] Scripturas legere, idque non simplicitèr nequè obitèr sed magna diligentia, &c. Audite obsecro [...] Biblia, animae [...] aliud vultis, vel nouum Testa­mentum, acquirite Apostolorum Acta, Euangelia continuos & sedulos Doctores. Hoc demùm malorum omnium D causa est, quod Scripturae ignorantur.; and exalting the authoritie of the present Church C aboue the Scriptures, are condemned by many antient Fathers.

IESVIT.

We know indeed by Tradition, that some in former times stood against many points of the Roman Doctrine, as Arrius, Pelagius, Waldo, the Albigenses, Wiclife, Husse, and some others; but they are not confessed [...] Fathers, but were noted for nouelty and singularity, and for such by Tradition described vnto vs, which kind E of opposition doth not discredit the Doctrine of the Church, but rather makes the same to appeare more cleerely and famously Apostolicall.

ANSVVER. A

[...] opposed the Doctrine of the holy [...] and of the [...] Church, and was [...] by [...], and the Fathers of the [...], and that by the Scriptures Socrat. Hist. [...]. li. 1. ca. 6. Cu­san. Concord. Cath. li 2. c. 6. Et secundú testimonia [...] decreuit Sy­nodus.: and the Pelagians were [...] con­uicted by S. Augustine, and his Scholers, out of the holy Scrip­ture. And although Pope Celestine approoued S. Augustines Faith, and condemned these Hereticks Epist. Coelest. 1. ad [...]. Gal­liae, tom. 1. Concil., yet that was not the principall reason whereupon they were reputed Heretickes, by B the Christian world, but the falshood of their Doctrine (proo­ued such by repugnancie with the Scriptures Aug. epist. 92. [...] sancti­tatis [...], de sancta­rū Scripturarū au­thoritate depromp­tae, faciliùs eos qui tā peruersa & per­niciosa [...] cessuros.) made them to be so esteemed. And how many Heretickes were discouered and confuted by the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares, out of the Scriptures, before the Roman Church ascended to the height of authoritie [...]. Mirandul. Theor. 8. Conuentus age­bantur, quibus abs­què Pontifice, in causis Fidei, quid sanctum, quid pro­phanum esset de­cernebatur.. The Waldenses were no Hereticks, as I haue formerly prooued, but were only branded with that aspersion, by Papals, whose pride and tyrrannie they did op­pose: and had S. Paul Syluest. Prier. li. d. Mod. Inquir. pa. 24. Ego credo si S. Hieronimus & Au­gustinus hodie vi­uerent, aut etiam ipse Apostol' Pau­lus, vix euaderent ignem, tàm excel­lentes sunt Inquisi­tores in ingenijs. himselfe beene aliue, and reprooued the errour and wickednesse of the Babilonian Harlot, he must C not haue escaped her censure and malice. Wicliffe and Husse, were blessed instruments of Christ, vindicating and defending Gods Truth, withheld in Iniquitie; neither did they hold such blas­phemies as the Romists cast vpon them. They might haue some opinions in points lesse materiall, wherein perhaps they concurre not with our Doctrine, as likewise the Waldenses; but as for those vile reports which Romists make of their Do­ctrine, no indifferent person will regard it: for euen at this day, when things are in present view and action, you calumni­ate the persons, and falsifie the Doctrine Campian. Rat. 8. Norint isti suorū axiomata. De' est author peccati. Nullum, nullū, non duo, non [...] reliquerunt. Si [...] vxor aut non possit veniat aucilla. Decalogus nihil ad Christianos. Opera nostra Deus nequaquam curat, &c. Rubenus. li. d. fals-Proph. ca. 20. Polluunt se vaga libidine, vxore proximi, [...], socrus cum nuru, pater cum filia. Id. c. 9. Conciona tores & foeminaespoliatis omnibus vestibus, supra mensas, &c. turpissima [...] in spectantibus. of all your Oppo­sites, D as grosly as euer Pagans traduced the Primitiue Christi­ans. And many of the Bookes and Writings of Wicliffe and Husse are extant, wherein are found no such Doctrines as Pa­pists haue charged them with.

IESVIT. E

Seeing (as euen Doctor Field doth confesse) when a Field, lib. 4. of the Church, ca. 14. Doctrine is in any age constantly deliuered, as a matter of Faith, and as receiued from Ancestors in such sort as the [Page 140] Contradictors thereof were in the beginning noted for No­ueltie, A and (if they persisted in contradiction) in the end charged with [...], it is not possible but such a Doctrine should come by Succession from the Apostles. What more euident signe of a perpetuall Apostolicall Tradition than this?

ANSWER.

You mistake the Doctors meaning, for he speaketh of the most famous and eminent of euery age, in sensu composito, that B is, of the most famous and eminent of euery age, which con­sent and agree the latter with the former. But he affirmeth not, in sensu [...], that whatsoeuer the most famous in any one particular age constantly deliuered, &c. is descended from the Apostles. Whiles this reuerend Diuine was liuing, such pas­sages of his booke were obiected against him, by Papists, which caused him to explane himselfe, and among other things, he saith D. Field. Ap­pendix. p. 3. cap. 7. pag. 42., I neuer make the judgement and opinion of present Bishops of Apostolicall Churches, to be the rule to know Traditions by, but denie it, &c. And make onely the Pastors of Apostolicall Churches succes­siuely C from the beginning, witnessing the same things, to be a rule in this kind.

IESVIT.

Protestants answer, that it is sufficient that the Ro­man Doctrine was contradicted by Orthodox Fathers, and that this may be prooued by their writings which they haue left vnto posteritie, though their opposition was not noted by Antiquitie, nor by fame of Tradition deliuered vn­to D posteritie. But this answere leaues no meanes whereby common people may know certainely the perpetuall Tradi­tion of Gods Church, without exact examining and loo­king into their workes, which common people cannot do. J prooue it, if against euery Tradition of the Church, difficill and obscure passages of the Fathers may be brought, and this doth suffice to make the same questionable; then no E Tradition can be certainely knowne without exact reading and examining, and looking into the holy Fathers.

But no Tradition or Doctrine is so constantly and cleere­ly deliuered by the Fathers, but diuers obscure and difficill [Page 141] places, out of their workes, may be brought against them, A with such a shew, that common people shall not know what to say. For what Tradition more constantly deliue­red by the Christian Doctours than our Sauiours consub­stantialitie with his Father according to his diuine nature? See [...]. li. [...]. d. Christ. c. 10. And yet the new reformed Arrians bring very many testi­monies of antient Fathers to prooue, that in this point they did contradict themselues, and were contrarie one to another: which places whosoeuer shall read, will cleerely B see, that to common people they are vnanswerable, yea, that common people are not capable of the answeres that learned men yeeld vnto such obscure passages. What then shall they doe? They must answere, that Antiquitie did neuer acknowledge such dissention among the Fathers, in the point of our Sauiours consubstantiality; which they would not haue omitted to doe, had there beene any such reall dis­sention, seeing they noted the Fathers opposition in lesser C matters.

ANSWER.

That which was brought in after the daies of the Fathers, could not be confuted by them particularly, and in expresse tearmes; neither could Antiquitie, or fame of Tradition, make report to Posteritie of those things which happened after­wards. But yet many things vttered vpon other occasion, are found in the writings of the Fathers, which prooue, that our present Romists are degenerated, and entertaine a beleefe re­pugnant D to the Primitiue Church.

But it is obiected that common people cannot know certainely the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church by such places of the Fathers, partly because the exact examining of the workes and sayings of the Fathers, requires great labour and skill, and so it exceedeth the abili­tie of these people, partly because many obscure and difficile passages are found in the writings of the Fathers, which will rather perplex common people, than resolue them.

whereunto I answere, That the rule whereby common people must examine Doctrine, is the plaine sentence of holy E Scripture Aug. sup. Psal. 93. Sicut Stellas in Coelo non extin­guitnox, sic mentes fidelium inhaerētes [...] Scrip­turae [...], non vin­eit [...].: and further triall and examination of Controuer­sies by the Fathers, and Ecclesiasticall Writers, belongeth to the learned, and principally to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church, who are to vse their gifts, to the instructing of the common people.

[Page 142] If the Aduersarie shall obiect, that Heretickes and deceiuers A may impose a false sence vpon the Scripture. I answere: That notwithstanding this, sufficient matter is found in the Scripture, to confute hereticall exposition, Greg. Mor. l. [...]. c. 8. Superbientes Haereticos & sacrae Scripturae senten­tias deferentes, quasi elatum Goliā suo gladio detrun­camus. and God alwayes stirreth vp some Pastours or other learned persons, to assist common people, which haue receiued the loue of truth, in true vnder­standing of diuine veritie necessarie to their saluation. Second­ly, If the Scripture may bee abused and prophaned by here­tickes, Tradition may with greater colour be pretended or a­bused by them (as appeareth by the Pharisees.) Thirdly, Tra­dition is founded vpon the authoritie of a present Hierarchicall B Church, which may erre, by the confession of many learned Papists Occham. Dial. part. 3. tr. 1. l. 3. c. 9. Lyra sup. Math. 16. Cusan. Concord. Cath. li. 2. c. 3. Mul­ta Concilia etiam rite conuocata, errasse legimus. Gerson. l. d. Appellat. à Pontif. propos. 4. & citatur à Francise. Pic. Mirandul. Theor. 8. Tam Papa quam Episcopus sunt deuiabiles à fide. Nichol. Clemangis Disp. sup. materia. Gen. Concilij.. But the Scripture is founded onely vpon the autho­ritie of Christ and his Apostles, and is acknowledged to bee sacred and diuine, by all Christian Churches.

IESVIT. C

In the same manner, Catholickes doe sufficiently answere Protestants, that bring places of Fathers against the recei­ued Traditions of the Church: as the reall Presence, Inuo­cation of Saints, and other the like, to wit, that Tradition, deliuered these Doctrines, as the vniforme consent of the Fathers, and neuer noted such oppositions as Protestants frame out of their writings, which is a cleare signe, that Protestants either mis-alleadge their words, or mistake D their meaning. For were that contradiction reall; Why did not Antiquitie famously note it, as it noted and con­ueyed by fame to posteritie, their differences about dispu­table matters? This Answere is full, and a certaine ground of persuasion; else (as I said) common people could ne­uer know the assured Tradition of their Ancestours, vpon which, they (as I prooued) build their Christian beleefe: seeing, as Doctour Field also noteth, there bee few, and Field. of the Church. in his Epist. Dedicat. E verie few, that haue leasure and strength of iudgement, to examine particular controuersies by Scriptures or Fa­thers, but needs must rest in that doctrine which the Church deliuers, as a Tradition neuer contradicted.

[Page 143] To discredit therefore a constant receiued Tradition, A it is necessarie to bring an Orthodox contradiction there­of; not newly found out by reading the Fathers, but a contradiction by the fame of Antiquitie deliuered vnto Posteritie: which kind of contradiction they cannot find, against any point of Catholike Doctrine. For let them name but one Father, whom Antiquitie doth acknowledge as a contradictor of Inuocation of Saints, Adoration of the Sacrament, Reall presence, Prayer for the Dead; B they cannot certainely, though they bring diuerse places to prooue (a thing which Antiquitie neuer noted, or knew of before) that the Fathers be various, and wauering about these Points.

ANSWER.

The Doctrine of Reall Presence, by way of Transubstan­tiation, and the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints, imposed C as an Article of the Creed, &c. were neuer deliuered by any vniforme consent of the antient Fathers, neither hath antient Tradition affirmed, That the Fathers vniformely taught and beleeued these points. And as for later Tradition, the autho­ritie thereof is doubtfull, deseruing no credit, further than it confirmeth that which it deliuereth, by the testimonie of Wit­nesses more infallible than it selfe. They which haue liued in succeeding Ages, haue no certaine meanes to assure them what the antient Fathers taught, but either their owne Bookes and Monuments, or the testimonie of their Coaeualls. And later D Traditioners may both corrupt the Writings of the Fathers Pammel. [...]. Cyprian. sup. Concil. Carthag. nu. 1. Vnde colligimus Cypriani scripta, vt & aliorum veterum, à librarijs, varie fuisse interpolata., and also by report, impose a false Tenet vpon them.

Our Aduersarie therefore beats the ayre, when he laboureth to gayne the Fathers vnto his part, vpon the sole Testimonie of latter Tradition, and vpon a Negatiue Argument Gillius, Com. Theol. d. Sac. Doct. & Deo, lib. 1. tr. 7. cap. 14. Argumen­tum [...], non est firmum ad con­uellendum Dogma aliquod siue [...]: Argumentum negatiuum est, cum ex eo quod patres aliquid non dixerint, aut hoc vel illo loquendi genere non vsi fuerint, concludit aliquis., taken from the silence of the Romane Church, omitting (in parti­alitie towards it selfe) the Narration of such Collections, and E Oppositions, as were made against the Doctrine thereof, out of the Fathers.

[Page 144] But when wee charge the Papalls with Noueltie, wee pro­ceed A vpon more euident grounds: First wee prooue, that the Romish Faith, opposed by vs, hath no foundation or warrant in sacred Scripture: Secondly, the same is an addition to the antient Rule of Faith Albert. 1. sent. dist. 11. ar. 7. Regula fidei, est concors, Scripturatum sen­sus, cum articulis fidei (in Symbolo Apost.) Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis, regitur Theologus.: Thirdly, the said Doctrine is not de­riued by perpetuall and vniforme Tradition, from the Apo­stles: Fourthly, the primitiue Fathers vertually opposed this Doctrine: For although these Popish Articles, as they are now explicitely maintained, were not in perfect being in the dayes of the antient Fathers, and therefore they could not so pun­ctually B or literally oppose them, as wee doe; yet in their Dis­putations, Tractats, and exposition of Scripture, they vtter many things, from which wee may collect that they beleeued not these Articles, and that the same were no part of the Ca­tholike Faith, in their dayes; and that if such Opinions had beene thrust vpon the Church (for Articles of Faith) in their dayes (as now they are) they would haue opposed them.

But our Aduersarie pleaseth himselfe immoderately with his Negatiue Argument, concluding, That because no Histori­call and expresse opposition was made against these Doctrines C by the antient Fathers, therefore the Tradition of the present Romane Church, concerning these Doctrines, is Apostolicall. As if a man should conclude, That because no expresse opposi­tion was made against the Pharisees by the antient Iewish Church, therefore their Traditions were diuine.

But if the sequele of this Argument be good, then the Pro­position following is necessarie, to wit, Euerie Doctrine against which the antient Fathers haue not made expresse and literall opposi­tion, is Apostolicall. But this is false, because some Heresies sprang vp in the Church after the decease of the antient Fathers; and against those they could make no such opposition, vnlesse they D had beene endued with Propheticall inspiration.

But if (as our Aduersarie obiecteth) euerie Doctrine is Apo­stolicall, against which the antient Fathers made no expresse and Historicall opposition, then the Articles following (which Protestants maintaine) are Apostolicall; to wit, The Romane Bishop and Councell may erre, The substance of Bread and Wine re­maine in the holy Eucharist, after consecration, The common Prayer and Seruice of the Church, which the vnlearned frequent, ought to be vttered in a knowne Language. These (I say) and the like Arti­cles, according to the Iesuits Argument, must be Apostolicall, E because no expresse Historicall or literall opposition was made against them by the antient Fathers.

But the Iesuit will peraduenture except, That euerie Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of the Romane Church, against [Page 145] which the Fathers haue made no expresse opposition, is Apo­stolicall, A and not euerie other Doctrine.

This verily, or any thing else as wilde and absurd, may be pretended; but it must be prooued; before it can merit any credit August. c. Par­men. Lib. 1. cap. 2. Ipse sine documen­tis [...] quitur, & vult nihil probans cre­di sibi. Idem, c. Do­natist. Lib. 7. cap. 48. Hic quia nullam rationem, aut testimonium Scripturarum attulit, diu nos tenere non debet.. And if the Romane Church may erre, and change her Doctrine, after the decease of the antient Fathers, then the Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of the Romane Church, is of the same qualitie with the Doctrine deliuered by the Tra­dition of other Churches.

But the first is true, Rom. 11. 22. and there is nothing pro­mised B in Diuine Writ to the Romane Church, to free the same from Error, more than to the Churches of [...] Anti­och, Ephesus, &c. For Hierusalem was the prime Mother Church, Esa. 2. 3. Luc. 24. 47. and the first Seat of all the A­postles; Ephesus was the Episcopall Sea of S. Iohn, and it was once a Ground and Pillar of Truth, 1. Tim. 3. 15. and Antioch was the Episcopall Sea of S. Peter Martyrolog. Rom. Notat. Ga­lesin. 8. Cal. Martij, Cathedra. S. Petri Apost. Huius Ca­thedrae Antiochi­nae. S. Ignatius me­minit in Epistola ad Magnefianos, Historiamque nar­rat. S. Clemens, Lib. 10. Recogniti­onum. Eam beatus Petrus fundasse & instituisse traditur anno Christi Dom. 38. vt ab Eusebio Annalium Moni­mentis proditum est. Septem autem annis ad illius gubernacula sedit., Baron. Annal. to. 1. anno 39. nu. 20. And yet euerie one of these Apostolicall Churches are departed from their antient integritie. Wherefore, except Ro­mists C can demonstrate by diuine testimonie, that their Prelates and Pontifes haue singular and ample promises beyond other Apostolicall Churches, they begge the question, when they arrogate sole perfection, infallibilitie, and immutabilitie to themselues Lorich. Institut. Cath. in Symb. ar. 10. pag. 49. Non tamen [...] sedis (Rom.) Rectores, se statim efferant, tanquam illa sola Ecclesia sit, & vt lo­quuntur, exclusiue Ecclesia Catholica sit, quasi oporteat sine iudicio, continuo probatum iri, quicquid ex illa sede enatum fuerit, & ad omnes Doctrinas & Constitutiones Pontificis, nihil sit ad ferendum, nisi ipse dixit. Hoc si illi sedi tribuerimus, omnibus erroribus Ecclesiam Catholicam exposuerimus. D.

THE SECOND PART A of the Iesuits Disputation, concerning B the supposed Errors of the PROTESTANTS.

IESVIT.

THe Conclusion of this Point, shewing that Protestants erre fundamentally. C

ANSVVER.

THis Conclusion is inferred vp­on false Premises, and therefore it is a Lying Conclusion. And if Protestants erre not in all, or any of the Articles ob­iected, eyther materially, or pertinaciously, then they erre not fundamentally. D

IESVIT.

Out of all this appeares, that the Romane is the true Church, and consequently, that Protestants haue funda­mentall Errors about Faith.

ANSWER.

If the Antecedent were graunted, yet the Consequence is E not necessarie: for the Church of Africa, in the dayes of Saint Cyprian, was a true Church; and yet they which beleeued o­therwise, touching rebaptising [...]. Carthag. de Bap. Haeret. apud Cyprian., than that Church, erred not eyther materially, or fundamentally.

IESVIT. A

Errours are fundamentall, that is, damnable, either in re­gard of the matter, because against some substantiall Article of Faith, the knowledge whereof is necessarie for the per­formance of a required Christian dutie; or in regard of the manner, they are held, to wit, so obstinately, as in defence of them, one denies the Catholicke Church. B

ANSVVER.

The distinction of errours into fundamentall, and preter­fundamentall, is collected out of the Scriptures: 1. Cor. 3. 12. Phil. 3. 15, 16. 2. Tim. 2. 18. Col. 2. 19. Heb. 6. 1. And the same is found in the Fathers Aug. c. Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 6. Alia sunt in quib' inter se aliquando etiam Doctissimi atque optimi regulae Catholicae Defensores, salua fidei compage non consonant & alius alio de vna re melius aliquid dicit & verius, hoc autem vnde nunc agimus, ad ipsa perrinet fidei fundamenta. [...]. Ep. 143. Sunt alia in quibus perniciosissimè erratur, &c., and in the Schoolemen, in tearmes aequiualent Aquin. 22. q. 2. ar. 5. Occham. Dial. p. 1. li. 2. c. 2. Stapl. Rel. c. 1. q. 3. ar. 6. notab. 1. C.

As all verities (according to S t. Augustine) are fundamentall, without the knowledge and faith whereof, people cannot at­taine saluation Aug. Enchir. c. 20. Sunt vera quae nisi credantur ad vitam beatam quae non nisi aeterna est non potest perue­niri, &c. Idem. d. Bon. perseu. cap. 21. Sed interest quan­tum & in quibus rebus erretur. &c.: so likewise all errours, directly opposing, and destroying right Faith, concerning those necessarie and es­sentiall verities, are fundamentall: 1. Tim. 6. 3. 1. Cor. 15. 4, &c. Gal. 5. 2.

All necessarie and essentiall veritie, either concerning Faith, or good manners (according to S t. Augustine Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. l. 2. c. 9. In ijs enim quae apertè in Scriptura posita sunt inueniuntur illa omnia quae cō ­tinent fidem moresque viuendi. Idem. d. Pecc. mer. & Remiss. l. 2. c. 35. Illud tamen credo, quod etiam hinc diuinorum eloquiorum clarissima authoritas esset, si homo illud sine dispendio promissae salutis ignorare non posset.) is deliuered in plaine places of holy Scriptures: and therefore they which accuse D others of fundamentall errour, must produce plaine and mani­fest Scripture against them Id d. vnit. Eccles. c. 12. Si non ea de Scripturis sanctis legunt, sed suis contentionibus persuadere conantur, credo [...] quae in Scripturis sanctis leguntur, non credo ista quae ab haereticis vanis dicuntur. Ib. c. 3. Auferantur illa de medio, quae aduersus nos in vicem, non ex diuinis Canonicis libris, sed aliunde recitamus.: And if after such ostension, Er­rants continue obstinate Aug. d. Ciu. Dei. l. 18. c. 51. Qui in Ecclesia Dei morbidum aliquid prauumque sapiunt, si correpti vtsanum rectumque sapiant, re­sistunt E contumaciter, suaque pestifera & mortifera dogmata emendare nolunt, sed defensare persistunt, haere­tici fiunt, &c., they are guiltie both before God and men, of damnable Heresie, and deserue the title and punish­ment of Heretickes.

These things being premised, concerning the Subiect of the Iesuits Proposition; I denie that errours in secondarie points, [Page 148] defended against the common tenet of the Catholike Church, A are alwayes fundamentall: for [...]. Cyprian, with 80. Bishops of Affrica Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian., did stifly defend Rebaptising, against the common iudgement of the Catholicke Church, and yet S. August. freeth them from the guiltinesse of damnable errour. Secondly, if all such errour be damnable, yet the Protestants are innocent, be­cause they defend no errour, great or small, wilfully or obsti­nately, neither doe they oppose, but humbly submit themselues to the iudgement of the true Catholicke Church.

The Pharisees of Rome enroabe themselues with glorious titles; but where doth the word of Christ endow them with B priuiledges beyond other Churches: shew vs out of the holy Euangelists, or the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles Aug. d. vnit. Eccles. c. 6. Legite nobis hoc de lege, de Prophetis de Psalmis de ipso E­uangelio, de [...] is, legite & credimus. Ibid. c. 15. Legant nobis hoc de Scripturis san­ctis & credimus. Hoc, inquam ex Canone diuinorum librorū legant, &c. [...] nobis hoc ex diuinis oraculis., that you are the onely Catholicke Church. All fundamentall veritie is deliuered in the plaine Texts of Scripture Chrys. [...] 2. Thes. Hom. 3. In diuinis Scripturis quae cun­que necessaria sunt manifesta sunt., Aug. d. Doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 9. And all fundamentall errour is condemned by manifest Scripture, Et Catholica fides in Scripturis manifesta est, The true Catholike faith is manifest in the Scriptures, Aug. d. Agon. Christ. c. 28. Ecclesia nonin parietibus consistit, sed in dogmatum veritate, Ecclesia ibi est, vbi vera fides est: The Church of Christ consisteth not of outward Titles and walles, but of the veritie of Do­ctrine. C Wheresoeuer true Faith is, there is the Church, saith S. Hie­rom. sup. Psal. 133. Where Faith is, there is the Church, saith Saint Chrysostome: Where right Faith is not, there is not the true Church. Et Ecclesia est Hierusalem, cuius fundamenta posita sunt super montes Scripturarum: And the Church is Hierusalem, whose foundations are placed vpon the mountaines of the d Chrys. Imperf. sup. Mat. Hom. 6. Scriptures: Eruite igitur aliquid manifestum, quo demonstretis Ec­clesiam Aug. d. vnit. Ec­cles. c. 16.. If therefore Papals will force vs to beleeue, that they are the only Catholicke Church, and that we must follow their Pope (though he lead vs to hell) Dist. 40. c. Si Papa. bring something euident, and D manifest out of the holy Scripture. Si diuinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet, quae canonicae in Ecclesia nominantur, perspicua firma­tur Authoritate, sine vlla dubitatione credendum est. [...] vero testibus vel testimonijs, quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi, credere vel non credere liceat, &c. If (saith S. Augustine) Aug. Epist. 112. c. 1. Si diuinarum Scripturarum, ea­rum scilicet quae Canonicae in Ec­clesia nominantur, [...] firmatur authoritate, sine vlla dubitatione credendum est. Alijs vero testibus veltestimonijs, quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur, tibi credere vel non credere liceat quantum meriti ea admonentem ad faciendum fidem vel habere vel non habere perpenderis. it be confirmed by the perspicuous authoritie of those diuine Scriptures which are Canonicall, it must, without all question, be beleeued: but as for other witnesses and testimonies, by which any thing is persuaded to be beleeued, it is lawfull for thee to beleeue or not E beleeue them, as thou shalt perceiue them to deserue credit.

IESVIT. A

Fundamentall errours of the first kinde, Protestants haue [...], particularly these Nine.

ANSWER.

Malice alwayes fighteth against Vertue, and laboureth to impose and rub off her owne faults vpon it, Chrys. sup. Gen. Hom. 62. Malitia semper contra Vir­tutem pugnat, & ei sua peccata Affri­care & [...] vult. and all they whose brests and minds are inhabited by Satan, testifie their venemous B rage with furious words Cyprian. Epist. 55. Omnes quorum pectora & mentes diabolus obsedit venenatam rabiem suam furiosa voce testantur.. If this Traducer be able to con­uince the Protestants of Nine, or of any one fundamentall er­rour, wee must acknowledge, that we are in a perillous state: but if hee onely depraue and falsifie our doctrine Aug. d. Nupt. & Concupisc. l. 2. c. 2. Quae verba tam recta & tanta luce fulgentia tenebrosis & tortuosis expositionibus, &c. depra­uare C moliuntur., or affirme that to be fundamentall errour, which is diuine veritie, then he prooueth himselfe to be one of his Ministers, of whom S. Gre­gory speaketh Greg. sup. Reg. l. 1. c. 2. [...] Antichristi est amor perfidiei, quo fidei [...] Redemptoris. Idem. Moral. l. 13. c. 6. Sicut incarnata veritas in praedicatione sua pauperes Idiotas & simplices eligit, sic contrario damnatus ille homo Antichristus, &c. Ad predicandā falsitaté suam astutos & duplices [...] est., Perfidious dealing is in the Tabernacle of Antichrist, whereby he gainesayeth the faith of the Redeemer.

IESVIT.

First, their Doctrine against Traditions vnwritten, whereby the foundation is ouerthrowne, on which wee be­leeue all other substantiall and fundamentall points, as hath beene shewed. D

ANSVVER.

Either you wilfully falsifie, or ignorantly mistake the Pro­testants Doctrine, concerning vnwrttten Tradition.

First, we admit in generall, all vnwritten Traditions, agreeing with the holy Scripture Chem. Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 1. d. Trad. pa. 68. Apo­stoli multa tradide­runt viua voce. A­postolici ab Apo­stolis ex Traditione viuae vocis multa acceperunt quae suis postea discipulis rursus tradiderunt. Sed Ireneus in­quit E omnia [...] fuisse [...] consona Scripturis. Et nos eorum nihil reijcimus, sed omnia quae Scripturis sanctis consentanea sunt, suscipimus & veneramur., which are deriued from the Apo­stles, and deliuered vnto vs, by the manifest and perpetuall te­stimonie of the Primitiue Church Caluin. c. Pighium. d. libero Arb. Non difficulter posset inter [...] & Pighium conuenire, si modo Ecclesiae Traditionem ex certo & perpetuo [...] & [...], non ex testimonijs hinc inde male [...] demonstraret. Gesner. l. sup. loc. Paul. 2. Tim. 3. 16. c. 7. Si [...] Traditiones eadem via per testificationem antiquissimae & Apostolicae Ecclesiae [...] nostra vsque tempora, deduxerint, [...] eas. Reza ad. Repet. Saint. Resp. pa. 13., and by the vniforme con­sent of succeeding Churches in all ages.

[Page 150] Secondly, we beleeue in particular, the historicall Traditions A of the Primatiue, and succeeding Churches, concerning the dignitie, authoritie, perfection, authors, number, and integritie of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture Chem. ibid. pa. 69. Et hanc Tradi­tionem qua nobis in manum dantur sacrae Scripturae li­bri reuerenter ac­cipimus. Aug. d. Ci­uit. Dei, li. 15. c. 23. & d. Doctrina Christ. h. 2. c. 8. &c. Faust. Manich. li. 11. c. 2. D. Fulke c. Rhem. 2. Thess. 2. num. 19. The bookes of the Scripture are giuen by Tradition, but the matter written in the bookes doth iustifie the Tradition to be true., and also the Histori­call Tradition of the said Church, concerning the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgin Marie Aug. d. Dogm. Ec­cles. B c. 69., and concerning the baptisme of infants Aug. d. Gen. ad Lit. li. 10. c. 23., and all other genuine Traditions, which maintaine the Faith and Doctrine, contained expressely, or by consequent in the Scripture.

Thirdly, we embrace such exposition of holy Scripture Chem. Exam. p. 74. Quartum ge­nus Traditionū, est de Expositione, ve­ro sensu, seu natiua sententia Scriptu­tae. Tertul. d. praescript. ca. 20. & 21. & 37. &c. Marcion. lib. 4. cap. 5., as being consonant to the rule of Faith, and to the text of Scripture, is affirmed by antient Tradition, to haue descended from the holy Apostles.

Fourthly, we beleeue the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed Chem. ibid. pa. 70. &c. Tertium ge­nus Traditionum, &c. pa. 74. Descrip­si haec Symbola vt ostenderem nos non reprobare quas certò constat veras & antiquas esse Apostolorum Traditiones. Aug. d. Fid. & Smbo. c. 1. & Serm. 115. de Temp. Ruff. Expos. Symb. Hier. epist. 61. ad Pammach. c. 9. Cassand. Def. lib. d. Offic. bon. [...]. pa. 820. Intelligentia Scripturae quae ex Traditione percipitur, non est ab ipsa Scriptura seperanda cum in ea contineatur, vel tanquam definitio in definito, vel tanquam conclusio in praemissis., both vpon the authoritie of Christs written word, and also vpon the voice and testimonie of vnwritten C Tradition.

If it shall then be demanded, Wherefore do the Romists and you so eagrely contend about the question of Traditions? and wherein lies your difference? we answer as followeth.

First, we yeeld the highest and most soueraigne authoritie to D the sacred Scripture Thom. Wald. Doctr. fid. li. 2. ar. 2. c. 27. n. 7. Videtis se­quendum esse in Ecclesia Catholica gradatim authori­tatem multiplicem Doctorum, scilicet, Cotholicorum omnium: [...] sanctorum magis, Ecclesiarum Apostolicarum potiùs & ex eis ampliùs Ro­manae Ecclesiae: & abundantius his omnibus authoritatem Concilij generalis: nec tamen alicni iàm dictae ita obediendum censea & tàm prona fide, ficut primae fidei Scripturae. Ibid. [...]. Omnis Ecclesiastica authoritas cum sit ad testificandum de Christo & [...] eius, vilior est Christi [...], & Scripturis sanctis necessariò post ponenda. Ibid. Longè distat authoritas [...], & eminet [...] cunctorum Doctorum etiàm to­tius E Ecclesiae Catholicae, quamuis super cius authoritate Catholica [...] Ecclesia., and make the voice and sentence there­of a supreame rule, and iudge of supernaturall Veritie; and we make Tradition vnwritten, subordinate, and ministeriall to ho­ly Scripture, admitting the same so farre forth only, as it is con­formable to the Scripture, and reiecting the contrarie.

Secondly, we affirme, that the Canonicall Scriprure contai­neth all supernaturall Veritie necessarie to saluation, and being receiued and vnderstood, is a sufficient and perfect rule of [Page 151] Faith Casland. Def. lib. d. Offic. pij viri. Nemo tam insanus est vt dicat cogniti­onem salutis non ex diuinis literis, sed ex Taditione [...] maiorum hauriendam. Idem. pa. 841. Non quià Canon solus non sibi ad vniuersa sufficiat &c. Jdem pa. 827. Non negamus ex sola Scriptura pe­ti ceitam definitionem &c. Idem. pag. 832. Illud inter nos conuenit nihil esse huiusmodi non Scriptarum Tra­ditionum quae non cum eis quae scripta sunt conueniunt atquè adeò in his quae scripta sunt non compre­hen duntur., and the sole doctrine thereof is sufficient to instruct A the whole Church, and euery member thereof to saluation. And, that Tradition vnwritten maketh no addition, or increase of new Articles of Faith, but is only an helpe and instrument Meisner. Consult. c. Lesseum. p. 590. Neque tamèn Traditiones simplicitèr omnes reijci­mus, sed si quae probatae sunt & à pat. ibus constantèr traditae illas recipimus, non vtfidei mensuram sed vt [...] stem temporis & argumentum Historicum. B to deliuer, applie, and interpret the doctrine expresly deliuered, or intended by the holy Ghost, in the Scripture.

Thirdly, we receiue no Tradition as diuine or apostolicall, but such as hath the plaine, manifest, and vniforme testimonie and approbation of the Primatiue Church Hosiand. c. Val. Analys. fid. pa. 126. Si ea Traditiones [...] quae in Ecclesia [...] fuerunt quaequè, [...] admittimus.. But our Aduer­saries either equall Concil. Trid. sess. 4. Sixt. Senens. Bibl. li. 2. pa. 123., or preferre Pigh. contr. Ratisb. lo. 3. Baron. [...]. tom. 1. anno 57. n. 11. Greg. Val. tom. 3. pa. 347. vnwritten Tradition be­fore the Scripture, and they make Tradition a diuers and larger part of the rule of Faith, containing many Articles which are neither expressely, nor inuoluedly reuealed in the Scripture Bannes sup. Thom. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. Stapl. [...]. sup. Ioh. 16. Pigh. contr. Ratisb. lo. 3. d. Ecclesia. Sed magna pars, &c. Andrad. Def. Trid. fid. li. 2. Ex Traditionibus nos multa accepisse agnoscimus quae sacris literis non continentur. Greg. Val. Analys. fid. li. 5. ca. 2. & 3., and they make the present Roman Church an infallible wit­nesse of such Tradition, affirming, that we are bound to beleeue C euerie Article, which the said Church Coster. Enchir. pa. 47. Petr. Soto. Infallibilis est regula, & certa quaecunquè credit tenet & seruat Romana Ecclesia, & in Scripturis D non habentur, illa ab Apostolis [...] tradita. deliuereth as a Tradi­tion, with the same assurance of Faith, wherewith we beleeue any written testimonie of S. Paul, or the holy Euangelists. And many of them teach, That it is not necessarie to deriue Traditi­on by a perpetuall descent, and current through all ages; but the voice of the present Church is sufficient to make any Ar­ticle ctedible and authenticall to vs Gretsar. Def. Bellarm. d. verb. Dei, li. 4. c. 9. 1713. & 1715..

Lastly, many particularopinions of antient Fathers (which they deliuered coniecturally or probably onely, and concer­ning which they haue not affirmed, that they were diuine or apostolicall Traditions) are ranked by latter Pontificians in the number of diuine [...], and made parts of the vndoubted word of God.

And thus the present Roman doctrine, concerning Traditi­ons vnwritten, is a Seminarie of Errour, and by pretext hereof, Pontificians obtrude vpon the Church many prophane, fabu­lous, E and superstitious [...], fansies, and nouelties re­pugnant to holy Scripture, and the antient Catholicke Faith. Let therefore impartiall Readers consider, whether this Ro­mish doctrine, debasing the sacred Scripture, and aduancing hu­mane [Page 152] Traditions Petrus Soto. Instruct. Sacerdot. part. 1. lect. 6. pag. 17. Quae ad [...] pertinent, magis ex Traditione & Spi­rit' Sancti Illustra­tione, quam ex Scriptura petenda [...]. Hosius. d. Ex­press. verb. Dei, pa. 50. Nō oportet Le­gis aut Scripturae esse peritum, sed à Deo doctum, vanus est labor, qui Scripturae impenditur. Scriptura enim [...] est, & egenum quoddam elementum. Non conuenit Christiano, [...] creaturae addictum esse, &c. Pigh. Hieratch. Ec­cles. B Et nisi hac admissa aut etiam Scripturis praemissa, ne [...] quidem authoritatem satis sibi constate, vt quae vniuersa indè dependeat. Qua non adhibita velut plumbeam quandam regulam, &c. tendeth not to the corrupting of Christian A Faith, and consequently, whether the same be not rather a fun­damentall Errour, than an Orthodoxall Veritie? And on the contrarie, whether the doctrine of the Protestants, maintai­ning the supreame authoritie of the sacred Scripture (which is Gods vndoubted word) and withall yeelding to genuine Tra­dition, the credit and honour which the antient Church gaue thereunto, is not fundamentall Veritie, and a soueraigne meanes to preserue right Faith.

IESVIT.

Secondly, their questioning the infallibe authoritie of lawfull generall Councels, thereby casting downe the foun­dation of Vnitie in Gods Church.

ANSWER. C

They which will not permit generall Councels to assemble, or to proceed lawfully, and which oppose the decrees of anti­ent Councels, are the Romists and not the Protestants.

First, The moderne Popes vsurpe the whole right and au­thoritieof calling and conuocating Councells Bulla Indict. Concil. [...]. a Iulio 3. Nos ad quos sum­mos pro tempore Pontifices spectat generalia concilia indicere & dirigere Bellarm. d. Concil. li. 1. ca. 12., contrarie to the antient custome and practise of the Church Cu­san. Concord. Cath. lib. 2. ca. 2. Licet vniuersalia Concilia saepè legamus conuocata per Imperatores, imò omnia D octo, vt. ex gestis haberi potest, &c. Euseb. d. vit. Const. lib. 1. ca. 37. & li. 2. ca. 6. & lib. 4. ca. 47. Socrat. Hist. Eccles. lib. 2. ca. 16. Sosomen. Hist. Eccles. lib. 3. ca. 10. Theod. Hist. lib. 2. ca. 8. Euagr. Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. ca. 3. Niceph. [...]. Eccles. lib. 14. ca. 34. Athanas. Apolog. 2. [...]. c. Ruffin. lib. 2. Doce qui eo anno Consules fuerunt? Quis Imperator ius­serit hanc Synodum conuocare? Leo Epist. 43. ca. 2. See Nilus, d. Primat. Papae, pa. 277. Concil Chalced. in principio. Haec sancta Synodus, quae secundum gratiam Dei, decreto pijssimorum Imperatorum congregata est, in Chalce­donensi ciuitate. Iacobatius. d. Concil. lib. 3. ar. 1. n. 19. Leo primus Pontifex, cum lachrimis Imperatori scripsit & supplicauit, vt congregaret concilium..

Secondly, They receiue and admit no Assessors and Iudges in Councels Didac. Nug­nus in 3. part. Tho. Addit. q. 20. artic. 3. Summus Pontifex E mittit ad. Concilium generale, Cardinales quos ipse vult, & vocat Episcopos quos ipse vult, & multoties non con­gregat Episcopos de vniuerso Orbe, sed de aliquibus [...]. [...]. d. Consist. part. 3. q. 1. pag. 114. Qui vul­gò creaturae Papae vocari solent. but onely their fast friends, to wit, men afore­hand oblieged by solemne oath [...]. Ego [...] Episcopus, &c. [...] ero beato [...] sanctaequè Rom. Apostol. Ecclesiae & Domino nostro Iulio Papae &c. [...] Romanum & Regalia S. [...] adiutor eis ero ad retinendum & defendendum, &c., to proceed according to the will and purpose of the Pope.

[Page 153] Thirdly, The Pope alone is appointed the authenticall A Iudge of all causes and matters, which are concluded in Coun­cels: he approoueth or refuseth whatsoeuer himselfe pleaseth, and all other Iudges and Assessors, are onely his shadowes and creatures Bosius. d. Sign. [...] 5. ca. 9. Po­test Pontifex Rom. qua parte voluer it habere Con cilia rata, eademquè vbi voluerit reprobare, & quod ipse [...] cit ab vniuerso Concilio sancitur. Paleot. d. Consistor. part. 1. q. 3. ar. 4. & 8. Speaking of the Colledge of [...], which may also be applied to Councels. Sicut manus in [...] distributio, eius nec robur nec vires imminuir, &c. Cum sempèr pendet ab eius imperio, illos huc [...] deflectere: sic Papa auditis Concilijs, [...] ea tanquam digitos in manu [...], aut si placeat, operi [...] admouere. Quemadmodum qui in nemoribus ligna caedunt, solam materiam administrant architecto, ad fabricam struendam, ille [...] ab [...] secernit, & quod aptius censuerit ad aedificium transfert: sic in rebus difficilibus post explanata ab [...] Concilia, decernit. B Papa quid sit agendum: & ideò illius vnius iudicio tanquàm supremae regulae, non [...] standum esse dici­mus, alioquin status Monarchicus [...]. Bannes. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. [...]. 70. Omnis qui contradixerit legatis praesentibus suspectus erit de Haeresi. Bellarm. d. Concil. 1. b. 2. c. 11. Idem est siue Pontifex expresse Concilium reprobet, siue Concilium agat contra Pontisicis sententiam. Ibid. c. 13. Quandò legatus ab eo missus [...] Con­cilio, sed agit contra voluntatem Pontificis, [...] non est verè eius Legatus, licet protali se gerat. Greg. Val. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 7. d. Concil. Si Legati sequuntur instructionem & quasi conceptam [...] Pontifics senten­tiam, &c. pa. 365. Binius. tom. 1. not. sup. Concil. Constantinop. pa. 515. Tantùm toboris & firmitatis quaelibet Sy­nodus consequi solet, quantùm authoritatis illi Apostolica sedes impertit. Bernard. [...]. d. sacr. Ador. cult. disp. 3. fect. 6. pa. 263. Certum est, quod quandò summus Pontifex, per seipsum non adest in Concilio, sed per Lega­tos, huiusmodi Legati prius [...] à summo Pontifice, de hijs quae in [...] Concilio agenda [...]. Bellarm. d. Imag. c. 14. Certum est Synodum cui repugnat Rom. Pontifex, nullius [...] authoritatis. Idem. d. [...]. li. 4. c. 1. Illud iudicium tum demum esse firmum, cum accesserit summi Pontificis confirmatio: proinde [...] summi Pontificis esse. Ib. c. 2 Ipsa infallibilitas non est in Concilio Episcopotum, sed in solo Pontifice. Azor. Instit. Mor. tom. 2. lib. 5 ca. 12. & ca. 14. Anton. Perez. Pentateuch. fid. vol. 2. du. 7. ca. 4. pa. 41. col. 2. [...] C legitimum, id est legitime congregatum, & in legitima congregatione [...], adhuc potest omnino erra­re, si ab instructione [...] Pontificis, vel latum vnguem discedat. Ib. Saepe Romani [...] mittunt per Le­gatos suos [...] eorum, quae Concilia decernere & stabilire tenentur, &c. Quod si [...] auderet definire [...], contrà instructionis tenorem, tunc temporis omnino erraret. Hinc [...], quoties contrà instructionem Pontificis, aliquid definit, siuè Legati Pontif. ascentiant, vt in [...] Constanti­ensi, siuè dissentiant, vt in Concilio Ephesino secundo. Ib. conclus. 3. Illa Concilia generalia, quoram decretis ascentiunt Legati-summi Pontif. [...] instructionem eius, possunt esse falsitati [...], &c. In Concilio Basi­leensi, de facto erratum est, Legatis Pontificis errorem approbantibus, & caeterorum [...] subscribentibus..

Fourthly, Whereas in words and tearmes they seeme to ad­uance and magnifie the antient Oecumeniall Councells, affir­ming that they honour them as the holy Euangelists, yet when they make against them, they regard them no more [...]. d. Rom. [...]. lib. 2. cap. 17. Resp. decretum il­lud magni quidem esse Concilij, sed non [...] factū, proindè [...] esse roboris vel [...]. He [...] of the Councell of Chalcedon. (as one of D their owne part affirmeth [...]. Vi­ues. Schel. in Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, li. 20. c. 26. [...] illa demum [...] videntur Edicta & Concilia, quae in [...] suam [...], reliqua non E pluris [...] in textrina vel [...].) than a couent of women pratling and chatting in a common bath, stoue, or Weauers shop. And this is apparant by their [...] or falsifying the Councells of Nice Concil. Nicen. 1. Cod. [...]. [...]., Constantinople [...]. [...] 2. An. Dom. 381. [...] [...]., and Chalcedon Synod. [...]. Action. 16. & ca. 28., when the same equal the Patriarke of Constantinople, or other Patriarchall Seas, to the Roman, or forbid the imposition of single life vp­on the Clergie Hist. Tripart. li 2. ca. 14. Socrat. Hist. Eccles. li. 1. ca. 8. Sosom. Hist. li. 2. c. 22. Niceph. Hist. li. 8. ca. 19. Gratian. Dist. 31. c. Nicen. Synod.; as also by the Councells of Basill, and Con­stance, decreeing, that the Popes sentence is fallible.

[Page 154] Cardinall Cusanus treating of generall Councells, deliuereth A these ten Positions following:

First, That a perfect or compleate generall Councell, con­sisteth of all the Patriarckes Cusan. Concord. Cath. l. 2. c. 3. Quod ex quinque Patri­archalibus sedibus plenum vniuersale Concilium Colligitur, gesta Octaui Concilij clare docent, &c. Et cap. 5. Plenarium Concilium est totius vniuersae Ecclesiae. and prime Gouernours of the Church.

Secondly, That a Councell which is celebrated by the Ro­mane Pontife, and those which are subiect to him onely, or ex­cluding B others, is a particular Councell Ibid. ca. 7. Non equitur vbi praesi­det Papa in Concilio vel eius legatus, ibi esse vniuersale Concilium vniuersalis Ecclesiae..

Thirdly, A generall Councell may bee celebrated, although the Pope refuse to ioyne and concurre, by his presence and consent Id. ca. 2. Si ex­pectatus non mit­teret, vel non veniret vel nollet Concilium congregatum, suae necessitati & Ecclesiae saluti prouidere debet. Hoc probat benè textus Octaui vniuersalis Concilij, &c. Quoniam dudum expectati fuerunt vicarij Seniorum Romae, & amplius expectare non sit iustum, incongruum omnino putamus, despicere fluctuantem Christi & saluatoris nostri Ecclesiam, per dilationem dispositionum quae illi debetur. Hinc ergo velut ex necessitate denunciamus. &c. Ac idem legitur in gestis secundae Ephesinae Synodi. C.

Fourthly, All which meet in Councells, ought to haue free audience and libertie, orderly to debate and determine matters in question Ibid. c. 3. Liber­tas talis in eo esse debet, vt quisque liberam loquendi habeat facultatem. Id. Ecce nunc essentialia ad vniuersale Concilium, vbi vniuersalia tractare debent, quod non secretè sed publicè, omnibus liberima detur audientia. Id. c. 5. Secunda Ephesina Synodus ritè congregata fuit, &c. Tamen defecit libertas, &c..

Fiftly, Whatsoeuer must oblige as diuine, vpon the deter­mination of Councells, ought to be confirmed by the autho­ritie of holy Scripture Idem. cap. 10. Oportet quod om­nia D talia, quae ligare debent, contineantur in authoritatibus sacrarum Scripturarum. Id. ca. 6. Secundum testi­monia Scripturarum decreuit Synodus..

Sixthly, No Councells are legitimate, wherein priuate respects are maintained, vnder pretext of Faith and Reli­gion Id. c. 3. Opor­tet quod priuatae causae religionis obtentu non exerceantur. vnde Leo Papa ad Theodosium Imperat. de errore Synodi Eph. dicit Dum priuatae causae religionis exercentur obtentu, commissum est impietate paucorum, quod vniuersam Ec­clesiam vulneraret..

Seuenthly, The Romane Bishop hath not that power which E many flatterers heape vpon him, to wit, that he alone is to de­termine, and others onely to consult or aduise Id. c. 12. Et vide­mus quantū Roma­nus Pontifex, vltra sacras antiquas obseruationes, ex vsu & consuetudine subiectionalis obedientiae hodie ac­quisiuit, &c. In Concilijs Rom. Pontificem in condendis statutis generalibus, eam non habere potestatem, quam quidem adulatores eidem contribuunt: scilicet quod ipse tantum statuere habeat, alijs consulentibus..

[Page 155] Eightly, It is without all question, That a generall Councell A properly taken; is both superiour to the rest of the Patriarchs, and also to the Romane Pope Idem, cap. 17. An vniuersale [...] proprie captum, scilicet quod vniuersam Catholicam Ecclesiam representat, sit supra Patriarchas & Rom. Pontificem, credo dubium esse non [...]..

Ninthly, Experience of things doth manifest, That a plena­rie vniuersall Councell may be deficient; and wee reade, that many Councels lawfully assembled, haue erred Idem, cap. 3. Multa Concilia [...] rite conuocata errasse legimus. Idem, cap. 5. Notandum est experimento retum, vniuersale Concilium ple­narium posse deficere. Idem, cap. 14. B.

Tenthly, Whiles we defend, That the Pope is not vniuersall Bishop Idem, cap. 13. Dum hanc partem defendimus, quod Papa non est vni­uersalis Episcopus, sed super alios pri­mus, & sacrotum Conciliorum, non in Papa, sed in con­sensu omnium vi­gorem fundamus, tunc quia veritatem defendimus, & vnicuique suum honorem reseruamus, recte Papam hono­ramus. C 99. Dist. Ecclesiae., but onely the first Bishop ouer others, and whiles wee ground the power of sacred Councels vpon the consent of the whole Assembly, and not vpon the Pope, we maintaine Truth, and giue to euerie one his due honour. And then concluding the former Positions, the Cardinall saith Idem, cap. 15. In Concilijs parum de illis omnibus inuenire potui, quae prae­dictis positionibus meis ad plenum non concordarent., I obserue little or nothing in antient Monuments, which agreeth not to these my As­sertions.

With this Cardinall, agree many other famous Papists; Oc­cham, Panormitan Panormit 1. De­cretal. d. Elect. ca. signif., Almaine Almain. Quaest. Vesp., Cassander, Ferus, &c. and a­mong the rest, Occham deliuereth these Positions:

First, That all generall Councels are inferiour to the holy Scriptures Occham, Dial. part. 3. tr. 1. lib. 3. cap. 13. Sanctum tamen Euangelium cum maiori reue­rentia & deuotione suscipiendum est, quam Concilium generale quodcunque., and that when S. Gregorie saith, That he honoureth the foure first generall Councels like as the foure Euangelists, this must be vnderstood, not of equalitie, but of similitude Ibid. Hoc [...] est, de generall Con­cilio ritè, iustè, & Catholicè celebrato, &c. Ita tamen quod hoc vocabulum sicut, omnimodam similitudinem ne­quaquam importet, ficut cum dicit Christus Estote perfecti sicut pater vester, &c., D Matth. 5. 48.

Secondly, Councels are not called generall, because they are congregated by the authoritie of the Romane Pope Idem, par. 1. lib. 6. cap. 85. Non ideo solummodo, vocatur Concili­um generale, quia authoritate summi [...] conuocatur.; and that if Princes and Lay-men please, they may be pre­sent, and haue to deale with matters treated of in generall Councels Ibid. Reges & Principes & nonnulli Laici, possunt si voluerint, ad generale Concilium conuenire, & eiusdem Concilij tractatibus interesse.. E

[Page 156] Thirdly, Ecclesiasticall Dignitie, as it maketh not men holy, A so it conferreth not infallibilitie of Iudgement Idem, par. 1. lib. 5. cap. 7. Dig­nitas Ecclesiastica non attribuit sanctitatem: & per consequens, non confert impossibilitatem errandi contra fidem..

Fourthly, A generall Councell, or that Congregation which is commonly reputed a generall Councell by the World, may erre in matters of Faith Idem, par. 1. lib. 5. cap. 25. Con­cilium generale licet sit pars Ecclesiae militantis vniuersalis, tamen non est Ecclesia vniuersalis. Igitur temerarium est dicere, quod Concilium generale contra fidem errare non potest. Ibid. cap. 28. & p. 3. tr. 1. lib. 3. cap. 9. & cap. 10. Concilium generale seu quod Concilium generale a maiori parte Christianorum putatur, potest errare B contra fidem..

Ioh. Ferus commenting vpon the Acts, chap. 15. compareth the Apostles Councell with moderne, and saith Ferus, sup. Act. 15. pag. 180. In re­bus fidei, & quae conscientiam tan­gunt, non satis est dicere, volumus, mandam': vides igi­tur quomodo [...] Apostoli. Simpliciter conue­niunt, nihil nisi De­um quaerunt, & ali­orum salutem ex­petunt, denique omnia prudenter perpendunt. Quid igitur mirum, si in hoc Concilio, fuerit Spiritus Sanctus, iuxta promissum Domini: vbi duo vel tres congregati fuerint, &c. Nos aliter conuenimus, nempe cum magna pompa, nosque ipsos querimus, atque nobis pollicemur, nihil nobis non licere de plenitudine potestatis. Et quomodo Spiritus Sanctus eiusmodi conuentus probare possit?: In matters of Faith, and things which concerne the Conscience, it is not suffici­ent to say, We will and command; but you must consider, in what manner the Apostles deale in their Assembly: They come together in simplicitie of heart, seeking onely Gods glorie, and the saluation of others; no meruaile therefore, if the Spirit of God was in this Councell. But our meeting is in another manner, namely, with great pompe, and seeking our selues, and promising to our selues licence (vpon C fullnesse of Power) to doe any thing. And (this being so) how is it possible for the Spirit of God to approue such Assemblies?

Seeing therefore, by the confession of these learned Papists, latter Councels, celebrated by the meere and absolute authori­tie of the Pope, are neither vniuersall Anton. Perer. Pentateuch. Fid. Vol. 2. dub. 4. cap. 2. Ad Concilia gene­ralia Occidentis, v. gr. Lateranense, sub Innocentio 3. ad Lugdunense sub Gregorio 11. ad Vi­ennense sub Cle­mente 5. denique ad Tridentinum, raros, aut nullos ex toto Oriente Episcopos, conuenisse videmus., nor of infallible Iudge­ment; D and (as experience testifieth) Papall Councels are ney­ther free, nor proceed in debating and deciding matters con­trouerted, according to the authoritie of the holy Scripture Syluest. Prier. lib. d. Mod. Inquir. pag. 9. Cur ergo sancti Patres suo tempore Haercticos per Scripturas expugnarunt? Resp. Hic est alia ratio temporis. E Nam tunc Ecclesia nondum fuit firmata, nec fides satis roborata: ideo necesse fuit per Scripturas cum eis [...]: nunc autem oportet de firma fide eos examinare.; and that of later yeeres, and especially since Pope Gregorie the seuenth, they haue wholly intended their owne priuacie [...] Syluius, d. gest. Basil. Concil. lib. 1. pag. 14. Dum vnius hominis (Papae) libidinem sustinere conantur, dumpque priuatum bonum com­muni anteuertunt, incredibile est quantas errorum nebulas excitent.: it is a malicious Censure which this Lojolist casteth vpon the Protestants, in charging them with fundamentall Heresie, for opposing the infallible authoritie of such Councels, and con­sequently, [Page 157] with deiecting the foundation of Vnitie in Gods A Church.

Protestants haue alwayes desired a lawfull generall Coun­cell, for the concluding of differences in Religion Chemnit. Ex­am. p. 1. d. Trad. pag. 84. Clamitanta multis iam annis, totius orbis [...] querelae, reg­num Pontificium multas corruptelas, abusus & supersti­tiones inuexisse in Ecclesiam: petunt in legitimo Conci­lio grauissimas has Controuersias ex­verbo Dei dijudi­cari, & definiri. Sed ecce Pontifi­cij, &c. Phil. Me­lancth. Resp. ad Ar­tic. Bauar. Inquisit. q. 7. Hac generali Interrogatione odia contra nos accendere student, quod videamur omnes Synodos, & omnia acta in Synodis reprehendere. Nos vero palam fatemur, oportere in Ecclesia iudicia esse, & affirmamus multas pias Synodos fuisse, & profuisse Ecclesiae, & maxime optamus nunc in his dissidijs recte constitui iudicium Ec­clesiae., and they are most readie and resolute to submit themselues to the de­termination thereof D. Andr. Episcop. Winton. c. Apolog. Bellarm. cap. 14. pag. 333. Date nobis Concilia legitime C congregata, & procedentia, &c. in eorum sententiam, imus statim.; and they yeeld the same honour and authoritie to all such Councels, which the antient Church in the dayes of Constantine the Great, Theodosius, and Martianus, and which S. Augustine did August. c. Donat. post. collat. cap. 15. Quasi [...] Concilia, Scripturis Canonicis, aliquando fuerint comparata. 739.; yea, which the more impartiall Romanes themselues, in precedent Ages, haue done. But the present Papalls will not endure a lawfull and impartiall Coun­cell; B and vnlesse themselues may be both Accusers, and Iud­ges Verger. d. Con­cil. Trid. Papa vult esse Dominus totius Concilij, & non modo illud indicere quando velit, & eo conuocare quales iudices ipsi videatur, & eijcere quos ipse velit, sed dirigere illic omnia, & cogere vt omnes dieant quicquid ipse imperauerit. Protest. Reg. Gal. facta Concil. Trid. Quippe quibus nec liber, nec tutus eo pateret accessus, neue idipsum Concilium, a quo excluderetur inuitissimus, generale totius Ecclesiae Catholicae, aut haberetur, aut appellaretur, quin potius priuatum existimaretur Concilium., and proceed as their forefathers, the Pharisees, did a­gainst the Apostles, determining all things by the Modell of their owne Cabala, they will admit no tryall by Councels Paraleip. Ab. Vsperg. in Concil. Basil. Eu­genium Papam tantum abesse, vt geueralibus Concilijs debeat obedire, vt tunc se maxime dicat [...], cum Concilij Decreta contemn at. AEneas Sylu. d. Gest. Basil. Concil. lib. 1. pag. 14., nor any other meanes of Pacification, for restoring the com­mon Vnitie of the Christian Church.

IESVIT. D

THirdly, their denying of the Primacie of S. Peter, and Tu es Petrus, & su­per hanc Petram, &c. his Successor; the Foundation which Christ laid of his Church, necessarie for the perpetuall gouernment thereof. Matth. 16. 18.

ANSWER.

PRotestants deny not the Primacie of S. Peter, but they yeeld vnto him, both as he was an Apostle, Primacie of Spirituall Authoritie, and Iurisdiction ouer the Vniuersall Church, Matth. 28.20. Ioh. 20.21. And also respectiuely to the other E Apostles (which were his Compeeres and Equals [...]. d. Vnit. Eccles. Hoc erant [...] & caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus, pari [...] praediti & honoris & potestatis. Chrysost. sup. Galath. cap. 2. lamque se caeteris honore, parem ostendit (Paulus) [...] se reliquis illis, sed īpsi summo comparat, decla­rans quod horum [...] parem sortitus sit dignitatem. Barlaam. lib. d. Pap. princip. [...]., in regard [Page 158] of all Apostolicall Authoritie) Primacie of Calling, Order, A Grace, Gifts Hilar. sup. Matth. Canon. 14. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 14. August. sup. Ioh. tr. 124. Read D. Reinolds Confer. Hart. cap. 5. diuis. 3. pa. 178. [...]. Serm. 66. B. Petrus & Paulus eminent inter vniuersos Apostolos & peculiari quadam [...], vttum inter ipsos quis cui [...] incertum est., &c.

And the place of Saint Matthew, chap. 16.18. prooueth not Saint Peter to haue beene a visible Monarch ouer the whole Church.

First, Our Sauiour affirmeth not plainely and literally, that B hee will build his Church vpon him, but vpon the Rocke: which hee confessed August. sup. Ioh. tr. 124. Super hanc ergo inquit Petram quam con­fessus es, aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, Petra enim erat Christus. Idem, d. Verb. Dom. Serm. 13. Tu es ergo, inquit, Petrus, & super hanc Petram, quam confessus es, Super hanc Petram, quam cognouisti, dicens, Tu es Christus, filius Dei viui, aedificabo, Ecclesiam meam. Super me aedificabo te, non me super te. Ambros. sup. Eph. 2. ver. 20. Super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, hoc est in hac Catholicae fidei confessione statuo fideles ad vitam. Hilar. d. Trinit. lib. 6. Super hanc igitur confessionis Petram, Ecclesiae C aedificatio est. Chrysost. sup. Matth. Hom. 55. Eusebius Emissen. Gregor. Beda, [...], Glossa Gratiani, Lyra, Ferus, [...], Stella, & complures alij., verse 16, [...], and not [...]; Vpon this Rocke, and not vpon this Peter: Non dictum est illi, Tu es Petra, sed, Tu es Petrus, Petra autem erat Christus; It was not said vnto him, Thou art the Rocke, but, Thou art Peter, for the Rocke was Christ. August. Retract. Lib. 1. cap. 21.

Secondly, If hee had affirmed expressely, That hee would build his Church vpon him; yet hee saith not exclusiuely, that hee would build the same onely vpon him, but in other places hee conioyneth the rest of the Apostles Orig. in Matth. tr. 1. Si autem su­per vnum illum Petrum, arbitraris vniuersam Ecclesiam aedificari a Deo, quid dices de Iacobo, vel Iohanne, &c. Ambros. sup. Psal. 38. Quod Petro dicitur, Apostolis [...] Hieron. c. Iouinian. lib. 1. At [...] super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia, licet D id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat. Idem, sup. Galath. cap. 2. Licet Petrum & Iohannem secum Apostolos habuerit, &c. Et super ipsos Ecclesiae sit [...] fundamentum. Cyril. sup. Esa. lib. 4. Orat. 2. Est omnium fundamentum & basis inconcussa Christus, &c. Fundamenta etiam proxima & viciniora nobis in­telligi possunt, Apostoli & Euangelistae, oculati testes & ministri Sermonis facti, in confirmationem fidei, &c. Ab ipso enim dictum est Diuino Petro, &c. Tu es Petrus, & super hanc Petram, &c. Petram opinor vocans, immotam fidem Discipuli, Dictum est item voce psallentis: Fundamenta eius in Montibus sanctis. Optime sanctis Montibus comparandi sunt sancti Apostoli & Euangelistae, quorum cognitio firmata est instar funda­menti posteris, non sinens eos, qui per ipsos irretiti sunt in reprobam fidem decidere. Cusan. Concord. Cath. lib. 2. cap. 13. Nihil dictum est ad Petrum, quod etiam alijs dictum non sit. Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. lib. 6. an. 68. Credimus & certa fide fatemur, Christum esse primum ac [...] totius Ecclesiastici aedificij fundamen­tum; sed super hoc etiam fundamentum, asserimus, alias Petras superimpositas, nempe Petrum, & caeteros Apostolos, quos Iohannes in Apocalypsi nominat duodecim fundamenta Coelestis Hierusalem. Victoria. Re­lect. 2. d. Pot. Eccles. Con. 4. Apostoli omnes habuerunt aequalem potestatem cum Petro & Paulus ad Gal. 1. & 2. Satis defendit, se parem potestatem cum Petro habere. Haec est aperte sententia Cypriani in Epistola E de vnitate Ecclesiae ad [...]: & habetur 24. quaest. 1. Ego dico tibi, hoc vtique erant caeteri [...], quod Petrus, pari consortio praediti & honoris & potestatis. Nec audienda est Glossa dicens, hoc debere intelligi in ordine & dignitate Consecrationis, non in potestatis plenitudine. with him, Iohn. 20. 23. Eph. 2.20. Apoc. 21.14. Matth. 28.19.

[Page 159] Thirdly, To be a Ministeriall Rocke, and foundation of the A Church, is not to be the sole Monarch of the Church: because S t. Peter might bee such, in regard of his Preaching and Do­ctrine, as the other Apostles were, and not in respect of Mo­narchicall dominion. Heereupon Turrecremate in his Sum. d. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 11. saith, Non argumentati sumus Petrum prima­tum habuisse quia dictus fuit fundamentum aut Petra Ecclesiae, sed quia singulariter, &c. Wee argue not, Saint Peter had the Pri­macie, because he was called the Foundation, or Rocke of the Church, but because he was in a singular manner so called. But B if the name of Rocke, argueth not S t. Peters supremacie, the singular applying thereof in one Text of Scripture, will not doe it; both because the speaking to him in particular, is onely a circumstance, and relation of a matter, granted by the words of Rocke and Keyes, but no addition of any other essentiall gift: and also because the same Title, in tearmes equiualent, is elsewhere made common to other Apostles Aug. d. Agon. Christ. ca. 30. Non sine causa inter omnes Apostolos huius Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustiner Petrus, huic enim Ecclesiae claues [...] caelorum datae sunt, cum Petro datae sunt, & cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur, Amas me, pasce oues meas. Beda. Hom. in Euang. Quem me dicunt? Potestas ligandi & soluendi, quamuis soli Petro à Domino data [...], tamen abs (que) vlla dubitatione noscendum; quod & caeteris Apostolis data est. AEnaeas Syluius. d. gest. Basil. C Concil. l. 1. p. 28. Maximus omnium Theol. Aug. super literam Math. Euang. Tibi dabo claues, &c. Ait, per verba illa iudiciariam potestatem datam esse, non solum Petro, sed alijs etiam Apostolis & toti Ecclesiae, in Episcopis & Presbiteris..

The Iesuit addeth, That we denie the primacie of Peters Suc­cessour: and that this Successour is the foundation of the Church, laid by Christ, and necessarie for the perpetuall go­uernment of the same.

I answere, First, S t. Peter, in one respect, to wit, in regard of his Apostolicall function, had no successour: for the Office of Apostles was extraordinarie, appointed by Christ, for the D first planting of Faith; and consequently, it ceased with the A­postles Victor. Relect. 2. Con. 4. Prop. 12.. Immediate calling, Propheticall inspiration, the gifts of Miracles and Languages, authoritie ouer the whole Church, and all the ordinarie Pastours thereof, were proper to the holy Apostles; and if none succeed them in these gifts and prerogatiues, then it is manifest, that in respect of their Apostle­ship Bellar. d. Rom. Pontif. l. 4. c. 25. A­postoli non suerunt ordinarij sed extraordinarij & quasi [...] Pastores, quibus non succeditur. Victoria Relect. 2. d. pot. Eccles. Con. 4. Propos. 12. Nemo [...] alijs Apostolis cum aequali potestate & authoritate iurisdictionis hoc est vt in toto orbe haberet plenitudineni potestatis, sicut [...] Apostolorum habuisset. E they haue no Successours.

Secondly, In respect of ordinarie Ministerie, and in regard of the power and order of iurisdiction, S t. Peter hath succes­sours, in the same manner, as the rest of the Apostles: to wit, [Page 160] all Bishops and Pastours Hieron. Epist. ad. Euagr. to. 3. pa. 150. Caeterum om­nes [...] suc­cessores sunt. Id. ad. Heliodor. Epist. 1. Absit vt de his quicquam sinistrum loquar qui Apostolico gradui succedentes, &c. Ambros. Dignit. Sacerd. ca. 1. Claues regni Caelorum quas in Beato Petro Apostolo [...] suscepimus Sacerdotes. Ibid. cap. 2. Quas oues & quem Gregem, non solum tune Beatus [...] Petrus, sed & nobiscum eas suscepit, & cumillo cas nos suscepi­mus omnes., teaching (either where hee plan­ted A Churches, or in any other part of the world) the same Faith and Religion, which himselfe and his fellow Apostles did Iren. lib. 4. cap. 43. Eis qui in Ecclesia sunt Presbyteris obaudire oporter, his qui successio­nem habent ab Apostolis, qui cum Episcopatus successione, Charisma veritatis certum, secundum placitum Patris acceperunt. Ibid. cap. 44. Qui Apostolorum Doctrinam custodiunt. Greg. Nazian Orat. 21. d. laud. Basil. Qui eandem Fidei doctrinam [...], [...] quoque throni particeps est, &c..

Thirdly, That S t. Peter hath a speciall Successour, differing B in kinde, from the Successours of the rest of the Apostles, and which is to bee for euer, a visible Head and Monarch ouer the vniuersall Church, from whom all Ecclesiasticall power is de­riued, and to whose sentence, in things diuine, euery Chrstian must submit himselfe; and that the Romane Bishop is the man, is deliuered as a prime Article of Christian Faith, by Papals Bellarm. d. Pon­tif. Rom. praef. Ex­trauag. com. l. 1. tit. 9. d. Maior. & obed. ca. vnam sanctam. Subesse Rom. Pon­tifici omni humanae creaturae, declara­mus, dicimus, defi­nimus, & pronun­ciam' omnino esse de necessitate salu­tis. Paul. Cararia. sum. mor. & Canon. q. 2. ar. 4. p. 4. n. 26. Non solum omnis fidelis populus, verum etiam infidelis, & omnis rationalis creatura, Papae imperio subiacet.: but it is neither confirmed by the holy Scripture Canus loc. l. 6. c. 8. Romanum Pontif. Petrosucoedere, non est perse quidem in Sacris literis Reuelatum. Dried. d. Ecclesia Dogm. l. 4. c. 3., nor by any diuine Reuelation, neither is the same deliuered in the holy Apostles Creed, or by any antient generall Councell, or by the vnanimous consent of the Primatiue Fathers. And sundry C Romists themselues haue made question of it Soto 4. Sent. Dist. 24. q. 2. ar. 5. Nulli particulari Ecclesiae addixit, neque aliunde insti­tutio Christi circa hoc constat, &c. Cusan. Concord. Cath. l. 2. c. 34. pa. 599. Non [...] probari Rom. Pontif. perpe­tuum Principem [...] esse. Succession in loco non [...] in [...]. AEneus. Sylu. d. gest. Basil. Concil. l. 1. Ioannes [...] The [...] peritissimus, glossam illam singularem, quae Rom. Ecclesiam orbi, praepone­ret, D dixitse omnino contemnere, beneque singularem esse, quae tam fatua diceret: indignumque fore vt illam quispiam [...], &c., and later Pontificians, doe with so many subtill sleights and inuentions propugne it, that all intelligent and impartiall men may plaine­ly discerne, That this Doctrine of Papall Supremacie is builded vpon the sand.

For if the Romane Bishop had beene appointed and establi­shed the perpetuall Successour of Saint Peter, in manner before mentioned: either our Sauiour himselfe would immediately, expreslly, and manifestly haue reuealed the same to his Church; or the holy Apostles would haue taken notice thereof, and de­clared the same to others. Also Saint Peter must haue carried himselfe as a Monarch among the other Apostles, and exercised the actions of Soueraigntie in the visible Church. But we find E in the holy Scripture, no supereminent iurisdiction, or Monar­chicall actions exercised by him Chrys in Act. A­post. Hom. 3. Petrus egit omnia ex communi Discipulorum [...], nihil ex [...] nihil cum [...]. [...]., no vassallage and subiection [Page 161] yeelded him by the rest of the Apostles. And if hee must haue A had a Successour in his Monarchie, the Apostles suruiuing him, Saint [...] li­ued 30. yeeres after Saint Peter. Baron. annual. to. 1. An. 69. n. 1. & to. 2. Anno. 101. n. 2. [...]. Haer. 66. Praeterijt generatio Aposto­lorum, à Petro in­quam vs (que) ad [...], & Ioannem, qui etiam [...] in mundo, vsque ad [...] tempora. should rather haue beene his Successours, than the ordinarie Pastours of one Diocesse. The Spirit of God also, together with so eminent authoritie, would haue conferred vpon [...] Successours, extraordinarie graces, of Learning, Wisedome, Holinesse, &c. necessarie for so high a calling. Also it is not probable, that Eusebius, and other antient Ecclesiasticall Histo­rians would altogether haue been silent of this Monarchicall authoritie of the Romane Bishop, neither would any Ortho­doxe Father or generall Councell haue confined the Romane B Pontife to equall bounds, with other Patriarkes. But the anti­entest Ecclesiasticall Stories, are absolutely silent of such a swel­ling c Eusebius, in his [...] Hi­storie speaketh no word of it. Bulen­ger. c. [...]. Si quando apud Euse­bium aliosque non­nullos de potestate sedis Apostolicae, Paulo obscurius agi videris; Sic [...], ante be [...] illud [...] secu­lum, &c. preheminence as moderne Papals claime; and the Fathers and Councells contest the same. Pope Stephan was slighted by S t. Cyprian, and the Bishops of Affrica [...]. apud. Cypr. Ep. 75. Atque ego in hac parte [...] indignor ad hanc tam apertam & manifestam Stephani stultitiam, quod qui sic de Episcopatus sui loco gloriatur; & se successionem Petri tenere contendit. Tertul. d. pud. c. 21. De tua nunc sententia quero, vndè hoc [...] Ecclesiae vsurpes? Si quia dixerit Petro. Dominus super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, tibi dedi claues Regni caelorum: velquaecunque alligaueris, &c. Qualis es euertens, atque commutans manifestam Domini intenrionem, personaliter hoc Petro conferentem: super te inquit aedificabo Ecclesiam meam., when he enterposed in their affaires: and Pope Victor, by the Bishops of the East Euseb. Hist. l. 5. c. 26.. The Oecumenicall Councell of Chalcedon Chalced. Concil. Act. 16. ca. 28. Centum quinquaginta Dei amantiss. Episc. sanctiss. noua Roma throno, [...] aequalia [...] D [...], recte iudicantes, vrbem quae & imperio & senatu honorata sit [...] aequalibus [...] antiquiss. Regina Roma priuilegijs fruatur etiam in rebus Ecclesiast. non secus [...] ac illa extolli & magni fieri, secundam post illam existentem., equalleth the Patriarch of Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome. Gregory the Great Greg. li. 4. Epist. 31. 32. 34. 38. 39. & li. 6. Epist. 24. Cusan. Concord. Cath. li. 2. c. 34. himselfe giueth the Papacie a deadly blow. And a C great part of Christianitie Graeci. Asiani, &c. Nilus Archiepisc. [...]. l. c. d. Primat Papae. hath euer to this day opposed the Papall Primacie. Therefore it is most improbable that this do­ctrine should be fundamentall veritie, which hauing no [...] or infallible grounds in diuine Reuelation, wanteth also the suf­frages of all antient Ecclesiasticall Testimonie.

IESVIT.

FOurthly, Their denying the foundation of true [...], which is one true Catholicke Christian faith, about reuealed Mysteries; bringing in a fantasticall faith, pre­tending, E That euery man is iustified, by beleeuing himselfe to be iust, or one of Gods Elect.

ANSVVER. A

YOu ought first to haue weighed our Doctrine, concerning the definition of Faith, and haue compared the same with the Tenet of sundrie of your owne Doctours, before you had accused vs of fundamentall Errour about the same.

First, We maintaine, that true Christian Catholicke Faith is a [...] and foundation (to wit on mans part) of Iustification [...]. d. Spir. sanct. ca. 18. [...]. B Damas. lib. 4. ca. 12. [...], &c. Cyril, in Iohan. li. 4. ca. 9. Ianua & via in vitamsi­des est, & recursus quidam atquè reductio à corruptione in immortalitatem. Aug. d. Temp. Serm. 181. Fides omnium bonorum est [...], & humanae salutis initium. Sine hac nemo ad numerum [...] Dei [...], & sine [...] in hoc seculo, nec iustificationis consequitur gratiam, nec in futuro possidebit vitam [...]. Fulgent. d. Incarn. & Grat. c. 20. Vita nostra à fide sumit initium, quia justus ex fide viuit. [...]. Sum. li. 3. [...]. 12. q. 2. Nos sequentes authoritatem Apostoli, & expositiones Sanctorum dicimus, quod fides formata praecedit omnem aliam [...]. Origen. sup. c. 4. ep. ad Rom. Aug. sup. Psal. 31. Et d. Verb. Apost. serm. 22., Heb. 11.6. Rom. 1.17. Iud. v. 20.

Secondly, We denie that euery man is iustified, by only be­leeuing himselfe to be iust; for he must be truely iust, before he can, or ought to beleeue himselfe to be so Meisner. An­throp. Dec. 3. p. 329. Credimus peccata nobis esse remissa, sed haec fides for­malitèr non iustifi­cat, verum [...] sequitur.. The promise of remission of sinnes is conditionall Musculus. loc. com. d. Remiss. pecc. sect. 6. Discernen­dum est intèr eam gratiam Dei, quae nullas habet adiectas conditiones, qualis est quod Solem suum producit su­pèr bonos & [...], &c. Et cam quae conditionaliter confertur, ad quem modum remissio peccatorum nobis con­tingit., Esa. 1.16, 17, 18. Ezec. C 18. 21. Pro. 28. 13. Math. 6.14, 15. Iohn 15. 10. & 16, 27. Heb. 5.9. and the same becommeth not absolute, vntill the con­dition be fulfilled, either actually, or in desire and preparation of mind: and the full assurance of remission of sinnes Beza. Colloq. Mompelgard. pa. 471. Edit. Tubing. Consolatio quod adoptati sumus, petenda est, ex effectis spiritus sancti, quandò videlicet, sentimus in nobis eiusmodi motus spiritus sancti, qui testificantur nos D vetè regeneratos. suc­ceedeth Repentance, Faith, Obedience, and Mortification, 1. Iohn 3.19, 20, 21, 22.

Thirdly, We denie, that it is an action of Christian Faith, praeuious or fundamentall to Iustification, for a man to be­leeue himselfe to be one of Gods elect; and admitting that one do not attaine the certainetie of Faith, but of Hope onely, that he is elected Aug. d. Cor. & Grat. c. 13. Quis ex multitudine fideli­um quamdiu in hac mortalitate viuitur, in numero [...] se esse praesumat quià id occultari opus est in hoc loco, vbi ca­uenda E est elatio.: if there be no other impediment found in him, besides this, we make no question but such a person may be [...].

Wherein then lyeth the fundamentall errour, concerning Faith and Iustification, wherewith we are reproched? If it be answered, That we erre fundamentally, by making sauing [Page 163] Faith, not only an intellectuall, but also a fiduciall assent Ioh. Ferus. sup. Math. 8. v. 8. Vera fi­des fiducialitèr ac­cedit, nòn dubitat Deū posse aut vel­le. & ca. 9. v. 2. Fides haec nihil aliud fuit quā fiducia in mi­sericordiā Christi. to the A promise of the Gospell The manner of this [...] as­sent is: Being hum­bled with sence of mine owne iniu­stice, I beleeue that God will be merci­full vnto me, and pardō all my sinnes for the merits of Christ my Sauior: and I depend and relie only vpon the merits of my Ro­deemer, as vpon the prime cause of my iustification.; the [...] must remember, that many of his owne Doctours affirme the same. Vega. d. Iustiff. lib. 14. Fides in Scripturis [...] idem est quod fidueia, & [...] idem quod considere, Faith in the Scriptures is many times the same that Trust; and, to beleeue, the same that to trust. Ian­senius Iansen. Conc. Euang. c. 32 p. 206. Nomine fidei in E­uangelijs cùm ei tribuitur salus aut consecutio omniū [...] volumus compleri, vtrum (que) nempè & assensum illū fir­mum in credendis de Deo ac Christo, & fiduciam ex illius omnipotente bonitare conceptam. Bernard. ser. 3. d. An­nunciat. Nèc oleum misericordiae, nisi in vase fiduciae ponis. Concord. Euang. cap. 32. The name of Faith in the Gospell, when Saluation is ascribed vnto it, containeth both firme assent, &c. and also considence and trust conceiued vpon the apprehension of his [...] and goodnesse. Adam. Sasboth. [...]. Dicimus Fidem in disputatione Pau­di de iustificatione accipi, vt complectatur non solum [...], verùm etiàm [...] in Christum propitia­torem. sup. Rom. 1. v. 17. The word Faith in S. Pauls desputation, containeth not only As­sent, B but also Trust in Christ the Mediatour. Ferus Ferus. sup. Math. c. 8. citatur à Sixto Senensi, Biblioth. lib. 6. [...]. 48. Non sempèr Fides est quod nos Fidem dicimus: Fidem nos dicimus [...] quae diuinis [...] produntur, & quae Ecclesia credenda proponit. Hanc Scholastici informem, Iacobus [...] appellat fidem. Qualis [...] est fides quae mortua est, formaquè sua caret, profectò non Fides sed vana opinio est, &c. secundùm Scripturam Fides non est [...] fi­ducia misericordiae diuinae promissae in Christo. sup. Math. Non semper Fides est, quod nos Fidem dicimus, &c. That which we call Faith, to wit, to assent to such things as are reported in diuine Histories, and which the Church propoundeth to beleeue, is not al­waies Faith, &c. for the Scripture speaketh of Faith in another manner; for according to it, Faith is a trust in the diuine mercie, promised by Christ: with these also concurre, Guilliaudus Guilliaud. sup. Ioh. c. 3. v. 16. & sup. Ioh. 6.53., Frede­ricus Nausea Nausea. Cath. Chatech. li. 1. ca 12. Fides qua iustificamur est constans firmaquè animi per [...] sanctum de Deima­iestate omnipotentia & bonitate, de què illius promissis indubitata persuasio: qua vt verbis [...] certam Fidem ha­bet, ita & de eius ergase bonitate, omnia sibi indubitato pollicetur.: and Suares Suar. d. fid. disp. 1. sect. 1. n. 5. Vega. d. D Iustif. lib. 9. c. 7. Multi Cath. ante editum [...] Concil. Trid. aiebant manifestum nobis esse posse, ea opera a nobis fieri, quae necessaria sunt ad Iustificationem, & exillis, & testimonio conscientiae nostrae suffulto & adiuto testimonio Spiritus sancti, [...] nos posse ad eam nostrae gratiae certitudinem cui non posset subesse falsum. saith, Multi Catholici putant sae­pe accipi in Scriptura Fidem pro fiducia, Many Catholicks think, that Faith is oftentimes taken in holy Scripture, for Trust. C

The Iesuit therefore wanted matter to fraught his papers, when he obiected this Article against vs, as a fundamentall er­rour. For if his owne Doctours, and the holy Scripture it selfe Steuart. sup. Iacob. epist. c. 1. v. 6. pa. 29. Fide i [...] licet in sacris literis pro certa persuasi­one vsurpetur qua vera esse credimus, quae nobis à Deo, siue per S. Scripturam, fiue per [...] sunt, [...] fuerint, siuè Historiae Heb. 11. [...] praecepta [...]. 20 Act. 15. siuè promissiones, aut comminationes: Hoc tamen loco Fdes pro fiducia [...]. [...] in Fide sapientiam, Deiquè caetera dona [...], [...] ex certa minimequè dubia persuasione & affectus fiducia, de diuina [...], [...], & [...] postulat., take the word Faith in this notion, wherein haue we merited so grieuous a sentence? But I haue produced many famous Doctours of his owne part, which say expresly the same that we doe, concerning the signification of the word E Faith, when it is said to iustifie: and in steed of many other [Page 164] Texts, I referre him to the places of Scripture following, Iam. A 1.6. Math. 9. v. 2. 22. & cap. 14.31. Rom. 9.33. [...], &c. Euery one that beleeueth vpon him, 1. Pet. 2.6. Now in regard of the matter of our Doctrine, the assurance of remission of sinnes, which we teach, is no other, than S. Bernard, Iohn Bacon the Carmelite, Caietan, Catherinus, Ferus, and many other Ponti­ficians haue formerly taught. Caietan sup. Rom. 8. Caietan. sup. Rom. 8. v. 15. Inspi­rat nobis confiden­ter appellate Deū patrem, & gemi­natur parris nomé ad signif. firmitudi­né & [...] fi­duciae. Testimoniū à Spiritu sancto & nostro sufficiétissi­mū habem' ad hoc vt credamus quod sumus filij Dei. Nā ex hoc testimonio clarè videmus, credendum nobis esse quod sumus filij Dei. We haue from the holy Ghost, and our owne, a most sufficient testimonie, to make vs beleeue, that we are the sonnes of God: for by this testimonie, we cleerely discerne, that we ought to beleeue, that we are the sonnes of God. And S. Bernard Ber. serm. 1. d. Annunc. Si credis peccata tua non posse deleri, nisi ab eo cuisoli peccasti, & in quem peccatum non cadit benè facis, sed ad­de adhuc, vt credas quià per ipsum tibi peccata donantur. Hoc est testimonium quod perhibetin corde nostro Spiritus sanctus dicens, dimissa sunt tibi peccata tua. Sic [...] arbitratur Apostolus gratis iustificari hominem per fidem., If thou beleeuest that he only can blot out thine B offences, whom thou hast offended, it is well: but ioine this also to the former, that by him thy sinnes are forgiuen thee. This is the testimo­nie which the holy Spirit yeeldeth in our hearts, saying, Thy sinnes are remitted vnto thee: and in this sort doth the holy Apostle thinke, that a man is freely iustified by Faith.

Now from the precedent positions, I argue thus: C

First, That Doctrine concerning the nature and actions of Faith, which is taught in holy Scripture 1. Ioh. 2. 5. & ca. 3.14, 19, 24. &c. 5.13. Rom. 8. 15. 2. Cor. 1.22. & ca. 5.5. Gal. 4. 6. Ephes. 1. 13, 14., and which hath the consent of many antient Fathers Basil. Aschet. q. 269. Gre. Naz. or. 15. d. Plaga grandinis. Hilar. sup. Math. Can. 5. Cyril. sup. Ioh. li. 10. ca. 3. Ambr. serm. 5. & sup. 2. Cor. 13. Chrys. sup. Rom. hom. 14. Aug. d. Symb. ad. Chat. c. 10. & tr. 5. sup. ep. Ioh. Constant. ap. Theod. hist. Eccles. lib. 1. ca. 7. Gregor. Mor. li. 6. c. 8. Bernard. serm. 1. Annunciat. Cypr. li. d. Mortal., and which was deliuered by many learned Doctors of the Roman Church Ioh. Bacon. sup. sent. refert. Lorin. in. 1. D Ioh. 2, 3. pa. 63. Caietan. sup. Math. 6. & sup. Rom. 8. & sup. ep. Ioh. Catherin. li. d. Cert. Gratiae. Cassand. Consult. d. Iustif. Marinar. or. in Concil. Trid. Dom. 4. Quadrages. an. 1546. Ferus, sup. Ioh. ca. 14. & ca. 17., is not fun­damentall Errour. But such is the Doctrine of Protestants con­cerning iustifying Faith, &c.

Secondly, No Church erreth fundamentally, which teacheth such a kind of iustifying Faith as Abraham, Iob, S. Paul, and other iust persons (commended in holy Scriptures) had.

But Abraham, Iob, S. Paul, and other iust persons (commen­ded in holy Scriptures) had such a iustifying Faith, as was both an intellectuall and fiduciall assent to diuine Veritie and Pro­mises. Ergo,

The Church of the Protestants erreth not fundamentally, E teaching such a iustifying Faith, as is both an intellectuall and fiduciall assent to diuine Promises and Verities.

The assumption is prooued by Rom. 4.18, 19, 20, 21. Iob 19. 25. Rom. 8.38. Gal. 2.20. 2. Tim. 4.7. And whereas Pontifici­ans [Page 165] bequarrel vs in this argument, two waies: First, saying That A these holy men had a particular promise made vnto them: Secondly, That they knew by extraordinarie Reuelation, that they were indued with Faith, Hope, and Charitie, which wee know only by coniecturall, or morall persuasion.

I answer, First, we haue particular promises contained in the generall, and the generall promises are particularly applied by the word of Absolution, and the Sacraments, and by the te­stimonie of the holy Ghost, speaking in the conscience of true beleeuers by effects of Grace Chrys. sup. Ro. serm. 14. Quando B vero Spiritus testatur quaenam relinquitur ambiguitas? Si enim homo quispiam vel Angelus, aut alia certe hu­iusmodi quae dam potestas aliquid promitteret, [...] quispiam dubitauerit. Suprema verò illa essentia quae & hocipsum largitur, quod promittit, atque adeo orare [...], [...] nobis perhibente, quis [...] de dig­nitate hac deinceps dubitare poterit. Catharin. lib. d. cert. Gratiae Assert. 2. Aut possunt hoc testimonium sentire in seipsis, & excipere & agnoscere, aut frustra datur. Beda. in epist. 1. Ioh. ca. 5, 10. Qui ita creditin filium Dei vt exerceat operando quod credit, habet testimonium Dei in se, illud vtiquè quià ipse quoque in filiorum Dei numero iure computetur. [...]. Jb. Qui in filium Dei credit, &c. in seipso habet testimonium, [...] se [...] in filium credat per Iesum, qui adoptatus à Deo est..

Secondly, they which want miraculous Reuelation, may vn­derstand, by ordinarie Grace, that they haue Faith, Hope, and Charitie, because the holy Scripture commandeth all Christi­an beleeuers to trie and examine themselues concerning these C Graces, 1. Cor. 11, 28. 2. Cor. 13.5. And godly persons which liued in former daies, knew they had these vertues, Psal. 119. 97. Esa. 38.3. Iob 27.5, 6. & 29.14. Luc. 9.24. Ioh. 21.15. And the Apostle speaking of other people, as well as of himselfe, saith, We know the things which are freely giuen vs of God Caietan. sup. 1. ep. Ioh. v. 19. Dili­gendo opere, non solū cognoscim' nos esse ex veritate &c. sed suade bim' cor­dibus nostris, non fictè, non blandien­do, sed in conspe­ctu Dei, vndè ap­paret, quod non de notitia euidentiae, sed de notitia Fi­dei, dixit in hoc cognoscim', ex illa enim oritur vt suadeam' intimis [...] corāDeo quod sum' ex [...]. [...]. sup. Ro. 8. v. 38. Cert' sum, pro persuasus sum, non de certitudine euidentiae, sed de certitudine persuasionis ( [...] constat esse Fidei) sermo est, 1. Cor. 2. 12. And S. Iohn saith, That he which receiueth the hidden Manna knowes it, Apoc. 2. 17. The Fathers also, and many Doctors of the Roman Church affirme the same. S. Augustine Aug. d. Trin. [...]. Video me [...] si credo., I see that I beleeue, if I beleeue: and in another place Jdem. sup. Psalm. 10. Haec duo non mihi incerta sunt bonitas illus, & [...] mea., These two things are not vncertaine to me, the goodnesse of God, and mine owne Faith: D and in another place Idem sup. Ioh. tr. 5. Nemo [...] hominem: redeat vnusquisquè in cor suum, si ibi inuenerit fraternam charitatem, securus sit [...] transijt à morte ad vitam, [...] in dextera est., Let euerie man enter into his owne heart, and if he find there brotherly Charitie, let him be secure, for he is passed from death vnto life: and in a fourth place Id d. Trinit. lib. 8. c. 8. Magis nouit dilectionem qua diligit, quam fratrem quem [...]. [...] sup. 2. Cor. 13. Qui Fidei suae sensum E in corde habet, hic scit Christum [...] in se esse. Aug. d. verb. Apost. serm. 6. Eccè adiuuante ipsius misericor­dia spiritum Christi habemus, ex ipsa [...], integrà Fide, Catholica Fide, spiritum Dei nobis inesse cognoscimus. Cyprian. lib. d. Mortal. Si in Christum credimus [...] & promissis eius habeamus, & non morituri in [...] Christum, cùm quo & victuri & regnaturi semper sumus, laeta se curitate venismus., [...] man knoweth the Charitie wherewith he loueth his brother, better than his brother.

But to the end the difference betweene our Aduersaries and [Page 166] vs concerning this question, may the better appeare, I will de­liuer A our Doctrine in certaine propositions.

First, We maintaine, that such persons only can haue true assurance and certaintie of their Iustification, which beleeue and repent, and are resolued to obey Gods commandements Beza Colloq. Momp. p. 471. Con­solatio quod adoptati sumus, petenda est ex effectis Spiritus Sancti, quando videlicet sentimus in nobis eiusmodi motus Spiritus Sancti, qui testificantur nos vere regeneratos, & in filios Dei adoptatos esse. Nam Spiritus Sanctus testimonium perhibet Spiritui nostro quod simus filij Dei, hos motus in nobis si sentiamus minime dubitemus nos vere esse filios Dei. D. [...]. d. Perseu. c. 15. Neque preterquam in studio bonorum [...] cuiquam certa esse potest. [...]. loc. com. to. 3. d. Iustif. p. 1089. Nequaquam affirmamus, quemlibet hominem sine discrimine cer­tum esse posse de salute sua, siquidem Epicuraeis contemptoribus omni paenitentia destitutis, tantum abest vt certi­tudinem gratiae persuasam esse velimus, vt potius certam damnationem illis expectandam esse doceamus, tota B autem quaestio est de homine peccatore veram & seriam poenitentiam agente, ac fide in Christum Mediatorem se errigente. an is [...] esse possit ac debeat. Chem. Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 1. pa. 185. Muscul. loc. com. d. Remiss. pecc. Sect. 6. Discernendum est inter eam gratiam Dei, quae nullas habet adiectas conditiones: qualis est, quod solem suum producit super bonos & malos, pluitque super gratos & ingratos, & eam quae conditionaliter confertur, ad quem modum peccatorum nobis remissio contingit..

Secondly, A Christian of a contrite spirit, beleeuing only that his sinnes are remissible, and which earnestly desireth re­mission of sinnes by the merits of Christ, and ioineth with this desire the exercise of vertue; receiueth forgiuenesse, al­though he be vexed with scruples and temptations, and want C assurance, and persuasion in himselfe, that his sinnes are re­mitted Chem. Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 1. pa. 185. d. Fid. Iustif. Fides nec semper, nec in omnibus est Iux ardens, sed saepè linum tantū fumigans, est enim [...] in Centurione, & Cananaea, est modica, Math. 14. imbe cillis, Rom. 14. & haec infirmitas vel est in agnitio­nc, Rom. 14. vel in fiducia, Rom. 9. iustificat autem fides, non propterea quod sit virtus, tam firma & [...], sed propter obiectum, scilicit Mediatorem quod apprehendit, aut apprehendere conatur: quando igitur fides in ob­iccto non errat, sed illud inter trepidationes fiducia quantumuis languida apprehendit, aut apprehendere cona­tur, est quidem modica & infirma fides, vera tamen fides, & Paulus, dulcissimas proponit consolationes in tali [...] infirmitate. Phil. 3. Apprehendo, imo magis apprehensus sum à Christo. Gal. 4. Cognouistis Deum, imo magis cogniti estis à Deo, ex sensu etiam consolationis & gaudij spiritualis, non semper iudicari vel debet vel potest, an fides sit vera. Sensus enim ille non precedit sed sequitur Fidem, & saepè absconditur, & [...] cruce & tentationibus. D.

Thirdly, The particular certaintie of remission of sinnes which iust persons attaine vnto vpon their Repentance, Obe­dience, and Faith, is not equall in the firmitie of assent to that assurance which they haue about the common obiect of Faith, to wit, concerning the articles of Creation, Trinitie, Incarnati­on, Resurrection, or the like Bannes. 22. q. 6. ar. 2. Concl. 5. pa. 235. Haec certitudo quod ego habeam lumen fidei super­naturale, nunquam est tanta licet sit infallibilis, quanta est [...] fidei circa obiectum directe [...] à Deo, & E ab Ecclesia propositum. Quia fides non causat directe illum assensum, sed per reflectionem intellectus supra suū actum, per quam expresse lumine naturali videt se credere, vtrum autem credat ex lumine fidei [...] argumen­tatiue, per bonam consequentiam, sed nullus Theologicus discursus est tam [...] quam assensio Principiorum. Ergo nemo potest esse tam certus se habere sidem, [...] certus est Deum esse hominem. [...]. Medina. sup. Thom. Aq. 1.2. q. 112. ar. 5. pag. 628., because these articles are imme­diately and totally reuealed in the holy Scripture; but that his sinnes in particular are remitted, vnto a penitent person, depen­deth [Page 167] vpon an Argument, whereof one part onely is immediate­ly A the Word of God, and the other part is a collection arising vpon reflection, and obseruation of a mans owne qualities and actions, and the conclusion is more or lesse certaine Bern. in [...]. 3. [...] crescis in gratiam, tantum [...] in fiduciam.; according to the condition of the second Proposition.

Fourthly, The certaintie and assurance of their owne parti­cular Iustification, which iust persons attaine vnto, is reduced by vs to certaintie and assurance of Faith, because one ground thereof is a Proposition, or Sentence, mediately Diuine; the other is inferred and concluded from that which is Diuine: for the Rule by which a man discerneth himselfe, to beleeue B and repent, is the Doctrine of Gods Word, declaring the qua­litie of Faith and Repentance.

Many Pontificians maintaine, That this Proposition, to wit, Pope Gregorie the fifteenth is S. Peters Successor, is of Faith Did. Nugnus, sup. 3. p. Tho. Addit. q. 20. ar. 3. Iac. Bro­wer. Clauis, Apost. ar. 4. Franc. Arau­xo. Carillo. Mich. Marcos. Mich. Vas­ques. Peres.; and yet the same is not an immediate Diuine Reuelation, and the collection thereof from that which is reuealed, is lesse eui­dent and certaine, than that which a iust person maketh concer­ning his owne particular Faith and Charitie.

Fiftly, The difference betweene some learned Papists (who liued since the Trident Councell) and vs, concerning this C Question, is very small (if it be any at all) for they maintaine, That iust persons may haue a true and certaine assurance, with­out distrustfull doubting of their Iustification Andr. [...], d. Iustif. lib. 9. cap. 47. Mature tamen om­nibus, hinc inde pensatis, probabi­lius profecto esse crediderim, posse aliquos [...], tantopere in exercitijs spiri­tualibus, & in fa­miliaritate Diuina proficere, vt absque vlla temeritate, possunt certo & absque vlla haesitatione credere se inuenisse gratiam & remissionem peccatorum suorum apud Deum. Ibidem, cap. 20. Possum gloriari & [...], quod mihi con­scius sum, me habere fidem synceram, spem certam, & [...] non fictam, in Deum & proximos. Ruard. Tapper, [...]. 9. pag. 81. Nam in intellectu ex consideratione [...] Dei respondet certa, & firma [...], omne dubium de peccatorum remissione excludens, non tamen infallibilis, quasi de eo haberetur ver­bum [...] peculiariter ad aliquem factum, ficut ad Paralyticum factum [...]. [...]. d. Cert. Grat. cap. 5. [...] remissionem, & gratiam Dei non solum sperare, [...] credere posse ac debere, quo [...] modo [...] debet? Eo planè sensu, quo [...] verbum Credo solet [...], pag. 161. Perer. sup. Rom. 8. Disp. 9.; and that in­fused Faith enclineth and leadeth immediately to this cer­taintie and assurance Ruard. ar. 9. d. Fid. & Spe. pag. 80. Quae quidem [...]; [...] multo sit infe­rior certitudine [...], quia tamen a sententijs Scripturae [...], ideo fides quae est virtus infusa mediate ad illam [...].. And it is worthie obseruation which Andreas Vega deliuereth concerning the Trident Councell, saying, Non negat sciri hoc posse per fidem, sed tantum negat sciri hoc posse certitudine fidei Vega, d. Iustif. lib 9. cap. 8. pag. 216. [...], in 1.2. p. 2. Disp. 201. cap. 2. [...]. 11. [...] semel concedamus, nobis certo constare [...] cui non [...] subesse falsum, nos habere dilectionis affectum erga Deum, [...] etiam certo nos esse in gratia, [...] aut [...] actu iustificamur, aut cum [...] E [...] est iustificatio.: The Councell denyeth not, that one may be able to know by Faith, that he is in the state of Grace; but it deny­eth onely, that this can be knowne by certaintie of Faith. D

It is also remarkable, That whiles the Romists accuse vs a­bout the definition of iustifying Faith, they forget the Beame [Page 168] which is in their owne eye: for they make such a Faith, the A foundation of true Iustification, as is common with Deuils August. in Ep-Ioh. tra. 10. Fides sine dilectione fides Daemonis. Iansen. Conc. Euang. cap. 32. Qualem fidem etiam Daemones habent. Mich. Pa­lac. sup. 3. Sent. Dist. 23. Disp. 7. Daemones credunt omnibus Articulis Fidei., Iam. 2. 19. and which, according to their owne Doctrine, is no true Vertue. It is (saith Michael Palacius Ibid. Disp. 5. Disputatio haec sub lite adhuc agitur. Albert' credit, non esse proprie virtu­tem sed improprie. [...]. Aquin. in 3. d. 23. q. 3. ar. 2. In­formis fides non habet actum per­fectum, & ideo non potest esse virtus. Bonauent. 3. d. 23. q. 2. Durand. 3. d. 23. q. 6. n. 11. Arch. Rubeo 3. d. 23. Non est virtus proprie dicta.) a great Question, and as yet vndecided among vs, Whether Faith be a true Vertue, or not? and Albertus thinketh, it is not properly a Vertue, but onely improperly. Aquinas, It hath not a perfect Act, and therefore it cannot be a Vertue. The like is affirmed by Bonauenture, Du­rand, Archangelus Rubeo, &c. And the same is manifest by rea­son: For Vertue is a good qualitie, making the person in whom it is seated, and his actions, good August. d. lib. Arbitr. lib. 2. cap. 18, 19. Idem, d. Mor. Eccles. Cath. cap. 6.; and the Faith which the B holy Scripture and the antient Fathers require to Iustificati­on Idem, sup. Psal. 32. In ipsa fide C sunt omnia opera quae diligit Deus. Sixtus, Papa, ep. 3. d. Mal. Doct. Vbicunque fidei fructus non est, illic quo­que nec ipsa fides esse credenda est. Hieron. sup. Gal. cap. 5. Cum dilectio procul abfuerit, & fides pariter abscedit. Saluian. d. Gub. Dei, lib. 3. Quid est credulitas vel fides? Opinor fideliter hominem credere Christo, id est fidelem Deo esse, fideliter Dei mandata seruare., purifieth the heart, Acts 15.9. and impelleth vnto righ­teousnesse, Heb. 11. 33. But informed Catholike Faith perfor­meth none of these things, Iam. 2. 17. And therefore the Ro­mists depart from the Scripture, and from Antiquitie, when they appoint a dead and informed Faith, which is no Vertue, to be the foundation of true Iustification.

Lastly, Our Doctrine concerning the forme and manner of Iustification, is the same which Peter Lombard Pet. Lomb. sent. lib. 3. d. 19. A. In eo quod sumus iustifi­cati, id est a pecca­tis soluti, &c. Di­cimur quoque & a­liter per mortem Christi iustificati, quia per fidé mor­tis eius a peccatis mundamur. Vnde Apostolus iustitia Dei est per fidem Iesu Christi. Et item quem Deus proposuit propiti­atorem per fidem in sanguine ipsius, id est, per fidem Passionis: Vt olim aspicientes in Serpentem AEneum in ligno erectum, a morsibus Serpentum sanabantur. E Si ergo recte [...] intuitu in illum respicimus, qui pro nobis pependit in ligno a vinculis Diaboli soluimur, id est, a peccatis: Et ita a Diabolo liberamur, vt nec post hanc vitam in nobis inueniat quod puniat Morte quippe sua, vno verissimo Sacrificio, quicquid culparum erat, vnde nos Diabolus ad luenda supplicia detinebat, Christus extinxit., the Maister of the Schoole, affirmed to be Orthodoxall in his dayes: His words are these, Wee are said also to be iustified by the death of Christ, because by the Faith of his Death, wee are cleansed from our sinnes: Whereupon the Apostle saith, The righteousnesse of God is D by the Faith of Iesus Christ (Rom. 3. 22.) whom God hath set forth, to be a propitiation through Faith in his bloud (Verse 25.) that is through Faith of his Passion; euen as in times past, they which were bitten of fierie Serpents, were made whole by looking vpon the Brazen Serpent, which was raysed vpon a peece of Wood. If therefore wee by the aspect of Faith rightly behold him, who was hanged vpon a Tree for vs, wee are loosed from the bonds of Sathan, to wit, from our sinnes.

[...] Vega affirmeth, That many Romane Doctors in for­mer [Page 169] dayes, denyed that men were formally iustified by any created A qualitie inhaerent, but onely by the free grace and fauour of God, ac­cepting man, and imparting the righteousnesse of Christ vnto him. And that vntill the Trident Councell, the present Doctrine of Ponti­ficians, concerning the formall cause of Iustification, was onely recei­ued as probable Andr. Vega, d. Iustif. lib. 7. cap. 24. Magna fuit iam ab aliquibus retro se­culis inter nonnul­los Doctores con­certatio, quae esset nostrae iustificatio­nis causa formalis: & quibusdam qui­dem placuisse videtur, nullam esse iustitiam creatam, a qua formaliter homo esset iustus, sicut ab albedine est homo albus: sed perinde esse hominem iustum, & amicum & gratum Deo, ab amore quo Deus illum amat, & ad Gratiam suam & beatitudinem acceptat, ac Petrus est Iohanni amicus & gratus, ab amore quo Icannes Pe­trum prosequitur. Ac [...] in hac sententia crediderunt Magistrum Sententiarum fuisse. Alij vero, &c. Causam formalem nostrae Iustificationis asseruere esse aliquam qualitatem creatam, &c. Et haec opinio ac­ceptata est ab Ecclesia in Concilio Viennensi, vt probabilior.. And before the said Councell, many learned Papists, to wit, Albertus Pighius, the Councell of Colen, set forth by Gropper, Antididagma Coloniense, Conradus Clingius, &c. maintained our Doctrine concerning the formall cause of Iu­stification, and were not condemned of Heresie by the Romane Church: Wherefore the same cannot in these dayes be a fun­damentall B Error in vs.

IESVIT. C

FIftly, Their extenuating the value of the price of our Redemption, not making it sufficient to giue inward sanctitie and puritie to mens soules, nor to rayse the good Workes of Gods children to a due proportion with their reward.

ANSWER.

NO Christian Church euer prised the oblation and merits D of Christ more highly and religiously than wee, Heb. 10. 14. Eph. 5.2. Acts 4. 12. Ioh. 1.29. and wee firme­ly beleeue the inestimable price and vertue thereof Bernard. Fer. 4. Heb. Pentacost. Mirabilis passio tua Domine Iesu, quae Passiones omnium nostrum propulsa­uit, propitiata est omnibus iniquita­tib' nostris, & nulli vnquam Pesti no­strae inuenitur in efficax. Ambros. lib. d. Isaach. cap. 8. Ipse Christus est os nostrum, per quod Patri [...], E oculus noster per quem Patrem [...], dextera nostra per quam nos Patri offerrimus. Idem, in Serm. Quodam. Omnia habemus in Christo, &c. [...] desideras Medicus est, fi febribus aestuas fons est, si [...] iniqua sententia, iustitia est, si indiges auxilio, virtus est, si mortem times, vira est, [...] tenebras fugis lux est: Si [...] desideras, via est: si alimentum quaeris, cibus est., for mans Redemption, Sanctification, Iustification, and Glorification, 1. Cor. 1. 30. And in particular wee beleeue expressely, and contrarie to our Aduersaries accusation, That the same is all­sufficient to iustifie a sinner in the sight of God, and to giue true and inhaerent sanctitie and puritie to mens soules, and actions: first, in this life, sanctitie and puritie, secundum statum viae, accor­ding [Page 170] to the condition of mans wayfaring state: secondly, in A the life to come, sanctitie and puritie of perfect righteousnesse, without error or sinne. And we beleeue, that the Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse effecteth all this, both by way of merit and influence Caluin. sup. Rom. 6. v. 4. [...] Apostolum non hic simpliciter nos adhortari ad Christi imitationem, ac si diceret [...] Christi exempla­ris vice esse, quod Christianis omnibus conuenit, imitari: nam certe altius conscendit, &c. Haec est autem [...], Quod mors Christi efficax est, ad nequitiam Carnis nostrae extinguendam, &c., Rom. 6. 3, 4, 5. Ioh. 15. 1. &c.

What then doth this Popish Momus accuse in our Doctrine? I suppose, his owne fancie: for it is ordinarie with Papals to B calumniate, saying, That wee hold Good workes to be mortall sinnes [...]. d. Iu­stif. lib. 4. c. 1. Bona opera non sunt bo­na, ex ipsorum sen­tentia, nisi nomine & secundum quid, reipsa vero & simpliciter sunt mortalia peccata. Perer. sup. Genes. cap. 6. Disp. 5. nu. 138., and that they are Vertues onely by extrinsecall denomination: and hee is also offended, that wee make not Good workes properly and condignely meritorious.

Concerning the first, I referre my Reader to the words of Melancthon Melanct. Corp. Doctr. tit. d. Bon. oper. pag. 20., and Beza Beza, Quaest. & Resp. in Opusc. to. 2. pa. 676. Bucer. & alij in colloquio, Ratisbon. pag. 313. Hoc vero tu pie le­ctor, nos de iustitia inchoata haec sen­tire & confiteri: Esse quidem illam iustitiam veram & viuam, Dei prae­clarum & eximium Donum, vitamque nouam in Christo hac iustitia consta­re, omnesque san­ctos hac ipsa quoque iustitia iustos esse & coram Deo, & coram hominibus, & propter eam quoque sanctos a Deo iustificari iustificatione operum, id est comprobari eos a Deo, laudari & remunerari. Attamen quamlibet haec iustitia vera sit & viua, &c., who treating of this Question, speake as followeth: Although the workes of regenerate persons are not so perfect and good, as that they are able to merit eternall C life, yet they are truly good, because they proceed from the Holy Ghost, who purisieth the heart by Faith, and because God is glorified by them, and wee our selues receiue excellent fruit August. d. Spir. & Lit. cap. 14. Praecepta Legis tam sunt salutaria facienti, vt nisi quis ea faecerit vitam habere non possit. by them, &c. The same are good, in regard of their obiect, forme, efficient, and end, Psal. 119. 167. Galath. 5.22. Phil. 2.13. 1. Cor. 10.31. They are good fruits, opposed to euill fruits, Matth. 7.17. workes of Light, opposed to workes of Darknesse, Eph. 5.9. a spirituall Sa­crifice, acceptable to God, Phil. 4.18. And the same are truly good Orig. sup. Rom. lib. 6. Non [...] in iustis [...] verae vir­tutes non sint, &c., non comparatione scelerum, not comparatiuely onely, but Regula virtutum, according to the Rule of Vertue. August. D c. 2. Ep. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 10.

The imperfection and sinne Greg. Mor. li. 5. cap. 7. Ipsa iustitia nostra ad examen diuinae iustitia deducta, iniustitia est, & sordet in districtione Iudicis, quae in aestimatione fulget operantis, vnde Paulus nihil mihi conscius sum, sed protinus adiunxit, sed non in hoc iustificatus sum. Ibid. cap. 8. & lib. 8. c. 13. E & 20. & 23. & lib. 9. c. 14. & 27. & lib. 35. c. 26. Bona quae nos habere credimus, pura bona esse nequaquam pos­sunt. [...]. d. verb. Esa. Serm. 5. Nostra si quae est humilis iustitia recta forsitan sed non pura, &c. Idem, d. Ded [...] Serm. 5. & sup. Cantic. Serm. 38. & 61. [...]. Confess. lib. 9. cap. 13. Vae etiam laudabili vitae si remota misericordia discutias eam Domine. which is adiacent and conco­mitant to the vertuous actions of iustmen, changeth not their [Page 171] kind, because the same is freely remitted: Et quicquid alias in A [...] vitij est, Christi puritate sepultum non imputatur, saith [...]. Whatsoeuer defect or fault is otherwise found in them, being couered with Christs puritie, is not imputed [...]. Instit. l. 3. c. 17. n. 10. [...]. Concil. En­chir. d. Sacram. p. 132. [...] illa [...], & opera nostra adiuta per gratiam [...] & si legem non adimpleant, tamen Deo placent, non quidē propter dig­nitatem voluntatis, seu operis nostri, sed imputatiue per gratiam.. And this Doctrine concerning the imperfection of good Workes, as they are considered in themselues (in this life) is deliuered, both by the Fathers, and by many learned Pontificians. Andreas Ve­ga d. Iustif, lib. 11. c. 38 Veg. d. Iust. li. 11. c. 38. Non so­lum verum est, vi­tam quorumuis iu­storum, multis ma­culis venialibus, iu­giter sordidari, & deturpari, sed ipsa etiam perfectorum opera, à bonitate illa longe deficeere, qua deceret nos Deum colere, laudare, & honorare: sunt quippe multis imperfectioni­bus quoad hic viuitur coniuncta, neque tam pura, neque tam sancta, & feruentia, quam magnitudo diuinae bo­nitatis, & beneficentiae in nos exigeret. Ibid. Multa nunc fieri à nobis bona opera, & absque vlla macula pec­cati, quae tamen si districtè vellet Deus nobiscum agere, iniustitiae essent, &c.. It is not onely true, that the life of all iust men, is daily spotted with many veniall sinnes, but the very workes of perfect men, are very deficient, from that goodnesse where­by it beseemed vs, to haue serued, praised, and honoured God: for B they are conioyned with many Imperfections, whiles men liue heere; neither are they so pure, holy, and feruent, as the largenesse of [...] goodnesse and bountie towards vs requires, and many good workes are now performed by vs, without any blot of sinne, which notwithstanding, if God should deale strictly with vs, were vnrigh­teousnesse. To the like purpose speaketh Cassalius Cassal. d. quadr. Iust. l. 3. c. 23. Aliud est loqui de nostra iustitia prout est sola: & aliud est loqui de nostra iustitia prout est cum poenitentia & charitate, prout est sola, fortassis manca, est mutila, & deformis, quia in multis deficimus omnes, [...] autem est cum poenitentia, & charitate, longe alio modo se habet, quia poenitentia nostra [...] nostros defectus a [...] dissimulari, & charitas facit nostros defectus à lege operiri: vbi vero defectus à lege dissimulantur & operiun­tur, nullus apparet defectus nullaque deformitas in [...] legis. d. quadri­part. Iust. lib. 3. cap. 23. The Councell of Colen Conc. Colon Imperfecta illa obedientia & opera nostra adiuta, per gratiam subsequentem, etsi legem non adimpleant, tamen Deo placent, non quidem propter dignitatem voluntatis seu operis nostri, sed imputatiue per gratiam. Mauburn. Si quaedam bona ex gra­tia agit, tanta indeuotione ea permiscet quod omnes iustitiae nostrae ( [...]) sunt Deo quasi pannus menstruatae quo foedius execrabiliusque nihil. Stella. Non est confidendum in propria iustitia, quia iustitiae no­strae D non sunt purae, iuxta illud Esaiae, facti sumus, vt immundi omnes nos. Gerson. to. 3. d. Consol. lib. 4. pros. 1. Quis gloriabit mundum cor se habere? Quis dixerit innocens & mundus sum? Quis non constitutus sub iudicijs Dei terribilis in Consilijs super filios hominum, non trepidauerit? Hinc afflictus Iob verebar omnia opera mea (ait Deo) sciens quod non parceres delinquenti. Et iterum, si voluerit mecum contendere, non poteto respon­dere vnum pro mille. Cui conformis est Oratio Prophetica, non intres in iudicium cum [...] tuo Domine, quia non iustificabitur in conspectu tuo omnis viuens. Et [...] si iniquitates obseruaueris Domine, quis sustinebit? Porro quid Esaias se cum coeteris inuoluens sibique vilescens humili confessione protulerit [...]. Omnes iu­stitiae nostrae tanquam pannus menstruatae. Quis igitur iustitias suas velut gloriabundus ostentauerir Deo: plus­quam pannum confusionis suae mulier viro. Quem denique non exterruerit Apostoli verbum dicentis. Nihil mihi conscius sum sed non in hoc iustificatus sum. Caiet. in. 2. Thess. 1. Vt digni habeamini regno Dei, &c. Non dicit digni sitis (quoniam non sunt condignae passiones huius temporis, ad futurum regnum) sed vt digni ha­beamini ab ipso Deo. d. Sacram. p. 132. Maubnrn. Roset. Exerc. Spirit. tit. 32. part. 2. d. 4. c. 3. m. 2. Didacus. Stella. sup. Luc. ca. 18. And many other, which I haue cited in my Defence of Dr. Iohn White, pa. 20. C

Concerning the second branch of the Iesuites accusation, E to wit, That Protestants extenuate the price of Christs redemption, not making it sufficient to raise the good Workes of Gods children, to [Page 172] a due proportion, with the reward. I answere: That if by due A proportion, &c. he vnderstand a dignitie in Good workes, [...] to the reward, then he must condemne Saint Paul himselfe, for ex­tenuating the price of Christs redemption, who saith, That the sufferings (Martyrdomes) of this present time, are not worthie to bee compared with the glorie that shall bee reuealed in vs, Rom. 8. 18. S t. Hierom. sup. Eph. 2. Nec affirmare licet, merita nostra, ex aequo Dei gratiae & misericordiae respondere, alioqui perperam dixisset Pau­lus, Rom. 8. Non sunt condignae passiones, &c. It is vnlawfull to affirme, that our merits are equall to the grace and mercie of God, for then S t. Paul had spoken amisse, saying, The sufferings B of this life, are not worthie, &c. Saint Chrysost. Imperf. in Math. Hom. 53. What haue we wrought in this world, to merit communion with God in his celestiall kingdome, and therefore the Apostle spea­keth iustly: I doe not thinke the passions of this life (condignely) wor­thie of future glory, &c. sup. Rom. Hom. 14. The Apostle in euery place laboureth to shew vs, that all which God doth for vs, is not of debt, but of meere grace: Leo d. Assumpt. serm. 1. Neque de qualitate operum pendet coelestium mensura donorum. The measure of celestiall gifts, depends not vpon the qualitie of workes. Saint August. sup. Ioh. tr. 3. Non pro merito accipias vitam ae­ternam, C sed tantum pro gratia: Thou shalt not receiue eternall life for thy merit, but onely for grace. Origen. sup. Rom. 4. I can­not persuade my selfe, that any worke of man can challenge reward vp­on debt, because wee receiue our power, to thinke, speake, and doe good, by the gift and larges of God. Saint Basil. sup. Psal. 114 Basil. Manet requies sempiterna illos, qui in hac vita legitime certaue­runt, non tanquam debitum [...] redditum, sed ob [...] Dei gratiam, in quo spe­rauerunt exhibi­tam. pag. 137.. Eternall rest abideth for them which haue lawfully striuen, not as due debt to bee rendred to their workes, but for the grace of the most bountifull God, in whom they haue trusted. Saint Bernard. serm. 1. Annunc. Mariae. Concerning life eternall, we know, that the pas­sions of this life are not worthie of future glorie, no not if one man D should endure them all. Neither are the merits of men such, as that therefore eternall life is due to them in right, or that God should wrong man, if he should not bestow the same vpon him, &c.

The arrogant and foolish opinion of moderne Papists, con­cerning the merit of condignitie, was alwayes opposed by Pontificians Ioh. Ferus. in Math. l. 3. c. 20. Do­cet [...] haec pa­rabola, primo gra­tiam E [...] non debitum, [...] à Deo nobis datur. Omnes enim iustitiae, nostrae, tanquam pannus men­struatae: imo ne ipsae passiones quidem huius temporis sunt condignae ad [...]. Quod si aliquando mercedem audis polliceri, scias non ob aliud esse debitum, quam ex [...] diuina. Gratis promisit, gratis reddit. Si igitur Dei gratiam & fauorem [...] cupis, nullam meritorum [...]. themselues Velosil. Aduert in [...]. & alios. in to. 8. August. Quaesit. 13. pa. 369. Scotus negat meritum de condigno, &c. si­militer Durandus & [...]., Scotus, Durand, Marsilius ab Inguen. Dionisius Cistertiensis, Gregorie Arminine, Thomas Walden. [Page 173] Paulus Burgensis, Ioh. Ferus, Eckius Eckius. in [...]. & d. praedest., Pighius Pigh. d. lib. Arb. li. 5. pa. 81., &c. And many A who propugne the doctrine of merit of condignitie, equiuo­cate, and speake improperly Scribon. Pantal. in Theandr. d. mer. Christ. Disp. 11. pa. 177. Cum longe praemium excedat meritum, & opus quodcunque homi­nis sit valoris finiti, quatenus [...] est Creatura, est finita, nunquam omnibus [...] operibus ex [...] posset gloriam scmpiternam promereri, & fruitionem infiniti boni, nisi ex diuina compla­centia B placeret Deo optimo maximo retribuere [...] vltra [...], serui enim inutiles sumus. [...] lib. 2. in sent. q. 18. ar. 4. Opus esse meritorium vitae aeternae, potest intelligi [...], vno modo quia tale est ex parte sui, vel secundum se, vel ex gratia cooperante. Alio modo [...] quia Dei [...] libera­liter acceptante, & ex illa dispositione liberali, tantum praemiare disponente pro opere sic facto. [...] est mo­dus minus proprius.. Paulus Cararia Theolog. Mor. & Canon. Reg. 1. ar. 3. p. 2. Stricte loquendo, non [...] meritum condigni, inter nos & Deum: If a man will speake properly and strictly, there is no merit of Condignitie betweene God and vs. Baltassar Nauaret. sup. 1. par. Thom. q. 21. ar. 1. ca. 28. pa. 603. God is said to bee a debtour to man, by a certaine Hyperbole. Gene­brard. sup. Psal. 19. v. 13. Opera sunt longe infra retributiones, Good workes are farre inferiour to the reward.

And whereas some Pontificians say, Altisiodor. sum. l. 3. tr. 12. q. 2. Mereri de condigno [...] fa­cere de debito de­bitum vel de debito magis debitum, ita quod iniuste agitur cum eo nisi reddatur ei quod meruit: Ergo Deus iniuste ageret cum eo nisi reddatur ei quod meruit. Rhem. Hebr. 6. Annot. 10. Good workes are meritorious, &c. so farre, that God should be C vniust if he rendred not heauen for the same. that God were vniust, if he did not condignely reward good Workes: Durand Durand. 2. Dist. 27. q. 2. n. 14. Sentire seu dicere oppositum est te­merarium seu blasphemiū propter quod si decedenti in gratia Deus non daret gloriam nihil iniustum faceret, &c. af­firmeth that this speech is blasphemous.

They are miserably diuided and distracted, about their do­ctrine of merit of Condignitie, like the builders of the Tower of Babell.

First, Some of them simply and absolutely denie it Dionis. Cistert. 3. Dist. 1. q. 2. ar. 3. & 4. d. 43. q. 3. ar. 1. Marsil. 2. q. 18. ar. 3. & 4..

Secondly, Some say good Workes are meritorious only, by reason of the promise and acceptation of God, and these also vpon the matter denie it Vasques sup. 1.2. p. 2. Disp. 214. ca. 1. Opera bona perse spectata, &c. Non habere condignitatem & rationem meriti, &c. D sed totam rationem meriti habere petitam ex promissione & pacto Dei affirmant, Scotus, Greg. Arimin. Gabriel, Occham, Alph. Castro, Vega, &c. Hij Doctores, reuera denegant miritum operum, & totam vim merendi ascri­bunt operibus Christi. Vide etiam pa. 805. [...]. d. Tripl. Hom. Offic. l. 2. c. 28. pa. 366..

Thirdly, Others affirme, they merit condignely, by the verie nature and dignitie of the work, secluding the diuine Promise Vasques ibid. Caietan. Soto, &c. vt [...]. Fran. Petigi­an. 3. Dist. 20. ar. 3..

Fourthly, Others affirme, that merit of workes, is founded, partly vpon the dignitie of the worke, and partly vpon the promise of God Bellarm. Suares. Medina. vt refert. Fran. Petigian. 3. Dist. 20. ar. 3..

Fiftly, Some of them hold, that God rewardeth according E to the rule of commutatiue Iustice Greg. Val. to. 1. q. 21. Suares. Disp­d. iust. Dei sect. 2. & 6. & refert Pius d. Ponte. sup. Tho. 1. q. 21. dub. 1.; others say, according to distributiue Richard. 4. d. 46. ar. 1. q. 1. Argentina. ib. q. vnic. ar. 1. conclus. 2. Capreol. 1. d. 45. q. vn. Hosius confess. c. 73. Ferrar. c. gent. l. 1. c. 93, &c.; and others, according to both Bell. d. [...]. l. 5. c. 14. Quod si quis hic explicari cupiat vtrū Deus secundū [...], an secundum commutatiuam, bonis hominū meritis sit praemia [...], breuiter habeat substantiam [...] secundum distributiuam, iustitiam sore, modū autem secundum commutatiuam..

[Page 174] Now considering this vncertaintie of Popish Faith, in the A matter of merit, and also the opposition thereof by so many of great note among themselues; the Iesuit was ouer precipitate in condemning Protestants of fundamentall errour, for not beleeuing that Doctrine, the certainetie whereof, himselfe, and his Colleagues are not able to deliuer.

But the Protestant Doctrine, concerning good Works, is perspicuous, orthodoxall, consenting with the holy Scripture, and the antient Church, and tendeth both to the honour of God, and the aduancing of the Grace of, Christ and also to the B promoting of the care and studie of good Works.

First, we beleeue that good Works are necessarie to saluati­on Apologia Ec­clesie Anglicanae [...] bona ope­ra necessaria esse Christiano ad salu­tem. [...]. apolog. Thes. pag. 263. August. d. Spir. & Lit. c. 14. Praecepta Legis tam sunt salutaria facienti, vt [...] quis ea fecerit, vitam habere non possit., and that all men which will be saued must carefully applie themselues to the practise and exercise thereof. Tit. 3.8. Ioh. 15. 2.8. Heb. 12.14. Apoc. 22.14.

Secondly, God rewardeth good Works of his bountie and grace Marsil. 2. q. 18. ar. 4. Talis est obligatio creaturae ad Deū quod quan­tò plus soluit, tantò plus tenetur, patet per rationem, [...] quantò plus soluit, tantò plus de merito habet & bonis operibus, & ergo tanto plus debet. with benefits spirituall and temporall. Gen. 22.16. [...]. C 6.35.2. Iohn v. 8.

Thirdly, in giuing reward, he considereth the mind and qua­litie of the doer, the integritie, measure, and quantitie of the worke. 2. Cor. 9.6.

Fourthly, the reward is certaine Chrys. Gen. hom. 55. Non ita fi­dere debemus, his quae in manib' ha­bemus & videmns, D vt promissionibus Dei. Idem. tom. 1. hom. d. Nom. Abrahae. Aug. sup. plal. 109. and infallible, yea more certaine than any temporall benefit which man presently in­ioies in the world, Gen. 22.16.

Fiftly, there is in all good Works a dignitie, not of desert or equiparance, either in respect of God, of whom we can de­serue nothing Perer. in [...]. 6. v. 5. disp. 5. n. 148. Praeter debita gratitudinis, quae nemosatis exoluere Deo potest, ea quoquè debita quae diuino praecepto persoluere tenemur, nemo perfectae persoluit., or in respect of the reward, but only of grace, diuine similitude, goodnesse, and honour. Phil. 4.8.

Sixtly, the reward of good workes is called a crowne of righteousnes Marsil. 2. q. 18. ar. 4. Iustus est in remunerando, quià iusta dispositione sua, disposuit ex gratia acceptationis, minus [...] maiori praemio coronare non iustitia debita, sed gratia & dispositione bene placiti diuini. [...]. Concil. Colon. d. Sacram. so. 130. Reposita est nobis Corona Iustitiae Dei, qua iustum est vt reddat, quod [...] promisit, non quidem ex debito sed ex gratia., 2. Tim. 4. 8. because it is bestowed on them E which exercise righteousnes, and in regard of their righteous­nes: [Page 175] but merit of condignitie and righteousnes are [...] A tstings, as appeareth in Angels and Infants which haue righte­ousnes, and are crowned with glorie, and yet they doe not merit.

Seuenthly, the antient Fathers maintained no merit of con­dignitie, but by the word Mereri, they vnderstood either to obtaine [...]. d. [...]. Dei, lib. 5. c. 24. Haec & alia vitae huius munera &c. quidā cultores Daemonū accipere meruerūt, B qui non pertinent, ad regnum Dei, &c. Idem. d. Temp. Serm. 49. Paulus meruit Indulgentiam, & Serm 58. Man asses [...] inter amicos Dei numerari. Ambros. Serm. 53. Iohannes tantam gratiam nascendo meruit, Idem. d. Paen. lib. [...]. ca. [...]. Ecclesia Domini Iesu meruit Aduentum., or to impetrate Aug. Epist. 105. Nequè ipsa remissio peccatorum sine merito est si Fides hanc impetrat. Isiodor. Exhort. ad Paenit. Niniuitae impia obscoena nefanda [...] flagitia, [...] paenitendo merentur. Vid. Andr. Vegam. d. Iustif. li. 8. c. 6. & 7.: and this is manifest, because they applie the word (Merit) not only to iust men, but also to sinners, saying, that they merited Repentance, remission of Sinnes, the calling of Grace, &c.

Eithtly, the prime part of mans iustice is the remission of his sinnes Ioh. Hessel. sup. Math. 6. v. 12. Huius vitae Iustitia praeci­puè (vt ait August de Ciuit. Dei, li. 19. c. 27.) in remissione peccatorum [...] C, and the righteousnes of Faith; for without these, there can be no true and liuing morall righteousnes, and where these are found, good Workes are neuer wanting.

IESVIT.

SIxtly, Their errours against Baptisme, the gate and en­trance into Christian life, whereof they deny the vertue to sanctifie men, and the [...] thereof for infants, to whom they grant Saluation without Baptisme.

ANSWER. D

ALthough some persons haue been Christians before their Baptisme, as S. Augustine August. d. Bapt. lib. 4. cap. 24. Sicut in Abraham prae­cessit fidei iustitia, & accessit Circum­cisio signaculum ru­stitiae fidei: ita in Cornelio, [...] sanctificatio Spiri­tualis in dono Spi­ritus sancti, & ac­cessit Sacrameutū regenerationis in lauacro Baptismi, &c. Ambr. li 5. epist. in orat. Funeb. Valentin. Imperat. Tilman. Segeberg. d. 7. Sacram. c. 1. P. Lombard. li. 4. Sent. Dist. 4. E. saith of Cornelius. Euen as in Abraham the justice of Faith was precedent, and the seale of Circumcision followed after: so likewise in Cornelius, spirituall Sanctification, by the gift of the holy Ghost, went before, and the Sa­crament of regeneration in the lauer of Baptisme succeeded, yet not­withstanding, the ordinarie gate and entrance into Christian life, is Baptisme. S. Ambrose (siue Prosper) d. vocat Gentium, lib. 1. cap. 5 Ambr. Origo verae vitae, veraequè iustitiae, in regenerationis est posita Sacramento, vt vbi homo [...], ibi etiam [...] veritas oriatur.. The beginning of true life and righteousnesse, is laid in the Sacrament of Regeneration, that looke where man is new borne, there E also the veritie of Vertues themselues may spring.

[Page 176] Neither do Protestants deny the vertue and efficacie of Bap­tisme, A to sanctifie men, but according to the holy Scriptures, Eph. 5.26. Tit. 3.5. Gal. 3.27.1. Pet. 3.21. Acts 22.16. Rom. 6.3. and the antient Church Aug. ep. 157. Non est salsa etiàm in paruulorū Bap­tismate, Remissio peccatorum, nec [...] dicitur, Ted veraciter agi­tur. Concil. Carthag. Ap. Aug. epist. 90. Quicunquè negat paruulos, per Bap­tismum Christi, à perditione liberari, & salutem percipe­re aeternam Ana­thema sit. Aug. sup. Ioh. tr. 80. vnde tan­ta [...] aquae vt corpus tangat, & cor abluat, &c. Id. Encherid. c. 42. Con­cil. Mileuitan. ca. 2. Proptèr hanc regu­lam Fidei, etiā par­uuli qui nihil pec­catorum in semet­ipsis adhuc cōmit­tere potuerūt, ideò in peccatorum re­missionem veraci­tèr baptizantur, vt in eis regeneratio­ne mundetur, quod generatione traxe­runt. Chrys. sup. psal. 22. Leo, d. Natiuit. serm. 4. Greg. Nissen. in Bapt. Christi. [...]., they teach and maintaine, That this Sacrament is an instrument of Sanctification, and remission of sinnes. The Liturgie of the Church of England, in the forme of administration of Baptisme, hath these words: Seeing now D. B. that these children be regenerate, &c. Wee yeeld thee heartie thankes most mercifull Father, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant, with thy holy Spirit, to receiue him for thine owne child by adoption, &c. And master Hooker Hooker. Eccles. pol. li. 5. sect. 59 pa. 132. & sect. 67. pa. 174. saith, Baptisme is a Sacrament B which God hath instituted in his Church, to the end, that they which re­ceiue the same, might therby be incorporated into Christ, and so through his most pretious merit, obtaine as wel that sauing Grace of Imputation, which taketh away all former guiltinesse, and also that infused diuine vertue of the holy Ghost, which giueth to the powers of the soule their first disposition towards future newnesse of life. Zanchius Zanch Miscel. li. 3 pa. 134. Cum Minister bap­tisat, D oculis mentis in Coelum sublatis, cogito & credo, Christum quasi manu suaè Coelo demissa, filium meum sanguine suo in remissionem peccatorum aspergere, per manum illius heminis, quem video aqua caput Infantis aspergentem. hath these words: When the Minister baptiseth, I beleeue that Christ with his hand reached as it were from heauen, besprinkleth the child baptised with water, with his bloud, to remission of sinnes. And in another place Idem. d. Trib. Eloh. lib 7. pa. 266. Spiritus sanctus cum incubaret aquis illis primis [...] mun­di, easque [...] & animaret, Symbolo quodam declarauit, quod facturus erat super aquas Baptismi à Christo instituendi, se nimirùm descensurum super Christum in specie Columbae, & mansurum super eum: & illum etiàm nunc incubare aquis nostri Baptismi easquè sanctificare, vt lauachrum sint regenerationis. Et qui baptizantur ele­cti, illos per hunc Spiritum sanctificari, regenerari animari ad opera bona., The holy Ghost mooueth vpon the water of Baptisme, and san­ctifieth C the same, making it to be a lauer of Regeneration. Caluin Caluin. Instit. lib. 4. ca. 15. §. 5. saith, Per Baptismum Christus nos mortis suae fecit participes, vt in eam inseramur, By Baptisme, Christ hath made vs partakers of his death, that we may be ingraffed into it. And in another place Caluin. ibid. c. 16. §. 17 At quomodo in quiunt regenerantur In fantes, nec boni, nec mali cognitione praedicti? Nos autem respondemus, opus Dei, etiamsi captui nostro non subiaceat, non [...] esse nullum., If any man demand, How can infants which want vnderstanding be regenerate? I answer, Although we are not able to fadome or vnfold the manner of this Worke of God, [...] it followeth not from thence, that the same is not done.

And the same author, with others of his part, maintaine the former Doctrine concerning the efficacie of the Sacrament of Baptisme, and they differ only from Lutherans and Pontifici­ans. E First, In that they restraine the grace of Sanctification only to the elect Vide Beza in Act. Colloq. Mons­belgard. Tit. d. Bap.. Secondly, In that they deny externall Baptisme to be alwaies effectuall, at the very instant time when it is admi­nistred Beza, ibid.. But our Aduersaries must be ouer rigid, if they shall [Page 177] censure questions of this nature, which are touching circum­stance, A so hardly, as to make euery such difference a fundamen­tall errour, especially because some among themselues (as the Master of the schole reporteth P. [...]. Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 4. Quamuis quidam diffiteantur, illis qui perituri sunt paruulis, in Baptismo dimitti peccata, innitentes illi verbo Aug. Sacramenta in solis electis efficiunt quod figurant? Jbid. G. Nec mireris rem aliquandò praecedere Sacra­mentum, cum aliquandò [...] longè post sequatur: vt in illis qui fictè accedunt, quibus cum postea paenituerint incipiet Baptismus prodesse.) affirme the same.

Thirdly, whereas the Obiector addeth, that Protestants de­nie the necessitie of Baptisme for Infants, granting them Salua­tion without Baptisme; he must vnderstand, that necessitie is ei­ther B absolute, or else of precept and supposition. We verily maintaine the latter necessitie of Baptisme, for the saluation of Infants, against the Pelagians and Anabaptists: and the contempt and wilfull neglect of this holy Sacrament is damnable to such as are guiltie of this contempt: and our Church Canon. Eccles. Synod. Anglic. ann. 1603. Can. 69. If any Minister, &c. prouideth di­ligently, that all Infants (if it be possible) may receiue Baptisme before they depart this life. But if it fall out ineuitable Tilman. d. 7. Sacram. ca. 1. Non allegauit Deus po­tentiam suam (vt est communis The­ologorum senten­tia) ità visibilibus Sacramentis, vt si­ne ipsis (modo absit coutemptus) saluare nequeat aut nolit, maximè quando impossibile est, [...] ea suscipere possit., that new borne babes, descending of Christian parents, cannot re­ceiue this Sacrament, not onely Protestants, but the antient Church it selfe, and discreeter Papists, haue thought it more C pious to hope of Gods indulgence towards such infants, than to aggrauate his vengeance with such rigour and extremitie, as the Trent Fathers Concil, Trid. [...]. 6. ca. 7., and their disciples Bellarm. d. Bapt. li. 1. ca. 4. Cabrer. sup. 3. p. Thom. quest. 68. ar. 2. n. 7. Henriq. sum. Theolog. li. 2. c. 22. Qui citat alios. do.

First, the antient Church allotted onely two seasons Tom. 1. Con­cil Ap. Surium. pag. 731. Socrat. hist. Ec­cles. li. 5. ca. 21. Tert. d. Bapt. cap. 19. & d. Cor. Mil. c. 3. Hieron in 14. ca. Zachar. & Epist. 61. ca. 16. Leo Epist. 4. Vid. Durant. d. rit. Eccles. Cath. lib. 1. ca. 19. n. 14 in the yeare for Baptisme, which they could not in their charitie haue thus restrained to set times, if they had beene persuaded D as moderne Papals are.

Secondly, Gerson Gerson. p. 3. serm. in Natiuit. B. Mariae., Biel Biel. 4. Sent. Dist. 4. q. 2., and Caietan Caietan. in 3. Thom. q 68. ar. 1. & 2. [...]. venet. Anno 1547. In late editi­ons the place is ca­strated., with many other famous Pontificians Tilman. Segeberg. d 7. Sacram. c. 1. p. 43. Thom. Elysius Clyp. Pior. Hom. Tit. 11. d. Bapt. ar. 3. Cassand. d. Bapt. Infant. p. 772. & 777. Eos quoquè infantes qui voto patentum, vel propinquorum Christo [...] sunt, ac iàm nunc voto & animi [...] Christo ad Baptismum oblati, si ante expirent quàm externum signum ad­hiberi possit, non priuari Baptismi gratia pie credi posse existimo., affirme, That Infants departing this life without Baptisme, may be saued by the speciall Grace of God, and by the prayers and faith of their parents. And the words of Thomas Elysius Elys. ibid. so. 102. Col. 2., a late Pontifician, are very remarkeable, saying, Opinio quam tenent Theologi plurimi, & Ecclesia secun­dum communem legem, est satis dura & onerosa, & non conformis E [Page 178] preceptis Christi quae sunt suauia & leuia. The opinion of many A Diuines, which is commonly holden by the Church (concer­ning the damnation of Infants, deceasing without Baptisme) is ouer hard and rigid, and in no sort conformeable to the pre­cepts of Christ, which are sweet and easie. And the same Au­thour: Non est haeretica, cum non sit contra Fidem Catholicam, sea ei conformis, & maxime secundum fidei pietatem. This opinion (which propugneth the saluation of Infants vnbaptised) is not hereticall, for it is conformeable, and not repugnant to Catho­like faith, and most conformeable to pietie.

To Elysius, I adde Cassander, Cass. d. Bapt. Infant. pa. 775. Vi­dentur haec (quae dicta sunt de Bapt. Flaminis) ad Infan­tes quoque non in­commode trans­ferri posse. Nihil enim eis ad salutem praeter aquae tinctionem, deesse videtur, ad quam tinetionem, parentum & Ecclesiae volun­tate & fide iam destinati sunt, cur igitur non hic quoque dicamus, supplere omnipotentis benignitatem, quod Sa­cramento desuerit, nisi Deum seueriorem se Infantibus, quam adultis exhibere putemus? a moderate and peaceable Ro­mane, B in his Booke d. Baptismo Infantum, which with many authorities and weightie Arguments, defendeth the same do­ctrine concerning Infants, against the common straine of rigo­rous Pontificians.

And thus againe, our braine-sicke Aduersarie fighteth against pietie and humanitie, obiecting that against Protestants as a C fundamentall errour, which moderate Romists themselues propugne, as the more safe and tollerable Doctrine.

IESVIT.

SEauenthly, Their errour against Reall Presence, which they denie, or else the mayne Article of the Creed, That Christ is still in heauen, at the right hand of his D Father: for they will not allow a bodie in two places at once.

ANSWER.

THe more learned Iesuites themselues, acknowledge Bellarm. d. Euchar. lib. 1. cap. 1. Greg. Vol. Tom. 4. Disp. 6. q. 3. punct. 1. Suares 3. q. 75. Disp. 46. Sect. 1. pag. 518. Caluinus, &c. Cum negaret corpus Christi esse realiter ac substantialiter praesens, in hoc Sacra­mento sed solum in coelo: nihilominus absolute concedebat, substantiam, & corpus Christi sumi & Manducari à fidelibus, ineffabili quodam [...]., That Protestants beleeue the reall Presence of Christs Bodie and Blood, in the holy Eucharist; and our Di­uines deliuer their Faith concerning the Sacrament in this E [Page 179] manner D. Bilson. BB. of Winchest. Diff. true Subiect. par. 4. pag. 779. [...], li. d. Spir. mand. om­nes vere Christia­ni, sacrae Coenae Domini, ex ipsius instituto communicantes, manducant corpus & bibunt sanguinem Iesu Christi spiritualiter, efficacitate Spiritus sancti. Junius, Animad. ad. [...]. d. Imag. cap. 9. n. 50. Eucharistiae Sa­cramentum [...] proprie aut figurate. Proprie Sacramentum capit & panem [...], & corpus [...] Domini, ex instituto & veritate Christi.: God forbid wee should denie, that the flesh and bloud of A Christ are truly present, and truly receiued of the faithfull at the Lords Table: it is the Doctrine wee teach others, and comfort our selues with.

The difference then betweene Papals and vs, is not concer­ning the obiect, or matter receiued in and by the Sacrament, B but touching the manner of Presence, and the manner of Re­ceiuing. Caluin Caluin. Opusc. lib. Consens. inter Tigur. & Calu. [...] no­bis (in Coena) Christi corpus & sanguinem, nullus nostrum negat, qualis autem sit corporis & sanguinis Domini communicatio, queritur. saith thus concerning the difference, That the bodie and bloud of Christ are communicated to vs in the holy Eucharist, none of vs denie; the question is, concerning the manner of this communication.

The sacred Scripture neither expressely, nor yet by any for­mall consequence, teacheth the Doctrine of Transubstantiati­on (as some learned Papists Caietan. in 3. part. Thom. q. 75. ar. 1. Edit. Venet. anno 1547. Peti­gian. 4. Dist. 10. q. 1. ar. 1 Et in hoc Caietanus [...] defecit, qui eneruauit vim hulus argumenti [...] Haereticos Sacramentarios. Dixerat enim in Comment. ar. 1. q. 75. 3. p. qui iussu Pij V. in Romana editione merito ex­punctus est, seclusa Ecclesiae Authoritate, verba illa ad veritatem hanc confirmandam non sufficere. themselues confesse) neither is C this Doctrine any part of the antient Catholique Faith (as some other among them say Suar. in 3. part. Tho. q. 75. ar. 5. Disp. 50. Sect 2. saith, That Scotus and Biel held so..)

The Fathers are against Transubstantiation: The mysticall signes ( saith Theodoret Theod. Dial. lib. 2.) doe not, after sanctification, depart from their owne nature, but remaine in their former substance, figure, and D forme. The Sacraments which wee receiue of the bodie and bloud of Christ ( saith Pope Gelasius Gelas. c. Ne­stor. & [...]. Bibl. Bign. to. 4. fo. 565.) are a diuine thing, and by them wee are made partakers of the Diuine Nature; and yet for all that, the nature of Bread and Wine ceaseth not to be. After consecra­tion ( saith S. Chrysostome Chrysost. ad Cae­sar. Monach.) it is deliuered from the name of Bread, and reputed worthie to be called the Lords Bodie: notwith­standing, the nature of Bread still remaineth. The signes, as touching the substance of the creatures, are the same after consecration, which they were before ( saith Bertram. Bertram. li. d. corp. & sang. Dom..)

To the other part of the Iesuits speech, Or else the maine Ar­ticle, E &c. I answer, first, we cannot graunt, That one indiuidu­all Bodie may be in many distant places at one and the same instant, vntill the Papals demonstrate the possibilitie hereof by [Page 180] testimonie of sacred Scripture, or by the antient Tradition of A the Primitiue Church, or by apparent reason. And if they shall except, saying, That they make not Christs bodie locally present in many places at once, but substantially [...]. d. Sa­cram. d. Euchar. Disp. 4. q. 3. punct. 5. Respondeo, Chri­stum existere sub speciebus Sacra­mentaliter modo, quodam admirabi­li & ineffabili, per modum substantiae spiritualis, secun­dum totam suam substantiam, quan­titatem & membra, [...] modo quo in coelis existit, ad dexteram Dei Pa­tris omnipotentis, non vero existere modo quantitatiuo, seu per extensionem [...], in ordine ad locum. Thom. Aq. p. 3. q. 76. ar. 4. Nugnus, ibid. Coninch. ibid. n. 66. Henriq. Sum. lib. 8. cap. 25. Reginald. Greg. Val. Tolet. Philiarch. Petigian. Angles. Barth. ab Angelo, Victoria, Chamerota, Pezantius, Vasques, Viguer. Institut. Theol. d. Euchar. & alij. onely; wee say with Augustine August. ep. 57., Spacia locorum tolle corporibus & nusquam erunt, & quia nusquam erunt, nec erunt, Take away their places from bodies, and the bodies shall be no where; and if they shall be no where, they shall haue no being. And in another place August Serm in Mont. lib. 2. cap 9. &c. Faust. lib. 20. cap. 11. Secundum praesentiam corporalem, simul & in Sole, & in Luna, & in Cruce, esse non possit., Corpora non possunt esse, nisi in loco; Bodies cannot be, but in some place. And againe August. sup. Ioh. 31. Vigil. c. Eutych. lib. 4. cap. 4. Fulgent. Trasimund. [...]. 2. cap. 5. Theod. Dial. lib. 2. Arnob. Adu. C Gent. lib. 6. Quae sunt priuata singulariaque natura, multa fieri [...], simplicitatis suae integritate seruata. Nunquid esse decem omnibus in millibus, potis est vnus, vno in tempore? non opinor., Christus homo secundum cor­pus, B in loco est, & de loco migrat, & cum ad alium locum venerit in eo loco, vnde venit, non est; The man Christ is in a place, accor­ding to his Bodie, and hee passeth from place to place; and when hee commeth to another place, hee is not in that place from whence hee came.

The Papals paralogize, saying, That because circumscripti­on and localitie are not of the essence of the bodie [...]. d. Eu­char. lib. 3. cap. 3. Non repugnat es­sentiae corporis, esse in vno & pluribus locis, cum sint om­nia extrinseca, & posteriora ipsa cor­poris essentia., there­fore by the omnipotent power of God, the bodie may be without them. But if this illation be good, then wee may likewise inferre, That because to be created, made, or begot­ten, is not of the definition of humane bodies Arist. 1. d. Coe­lo. Text. 2. Corpus est quod diuisibile est secundum om­nes mensuras., therefore hu­mane bodies, by the omnipotencie of God, may be increate, and without beginning. The learned Iulius Scaliger Scalig. d. Sub­til. Exerc. 5. Sect. 6. spea­keth D in this manner: (Tametsi quod non includitur in definitione, abesse potest, à definito in definitione, non omne tamen abesse potest, à re definita. Propria enim quae vocantur, in definitione non ponuntur, à re tamen abesse nequeunt, cuius propria sunt, Etsi namque sunt na­tura suis subiectis posteriora, non tamen re, &c. Qua necessitate, coniunctum cum corpore locum, arbitror.) Although that which is not included in the definition, may be separated from the thing defi­ned, in the very definition, yet it cannot be parted from the subiect, or thing, which is defined: for the essentiall properties of things are not placed in the definition, yet they cannot be diuided from the E subiect, whose properties they be: And although by posterioritie of nature, they follow the subiects, yet indeed they are inseparable. And thus, place or circumscription is inseparably conioyned with a bodie.

[Page 181] Secondly, The bodie of Christ in the Eucharist, hath mag­nitude, A and quantitie, as Aquinas Aquin. 3. Quest. 76. ar. 4. substantia corporis Christi, realiter non denu­datur a sua quanti­tate dimensiua, & ab alijs accidenti­bus. and other Schoolemen Nugnus, ibid. Fides est ( [...] vt op­positum sit errone­um) quod tota quantitas corporis Christi Domini, est B in hoc Sacramento. commonly teach. But things which haue magnitude, and quantitie, are diuisible, and limitted and confined to a certaine space, and measure, equall to their bulke and materiall sub­stance: also they haue distance of parts, and are extended at leastwise in order to themselues, and bounded by their owne termination, compasse, or surface, although nothing extrinse­call to them, should containe them outwardly (as is instanced in the highest Heauens Bellarm. d. Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 5. Sententia communis Scholarum & Ecclesiae est, &c. Petigian. 4. d. 10. q. 1. ar. 4. Dub. 2. Est conclusio [...] quod corpus Domini in Eucharistia, suam habet quantitatem, & est communis opinio omnium Theologorum. c Scalig. d. Subtil. Exerc. 5. Sect. 3. Primum Coelum est in loco, & sane in suo spacio quod occupat. Bellarm. d. Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 7..)

When Sophisters say, That Christs bodie hath quantitie, and not the manner (or nature of quantitie) they deliuer plaine Chimaera's, and Fictions: For as a thing cannot be a substance, and want the proper nature and manner of a substance, so like­wise a bodie cannot haue quantitie, and want the proper man­ner C and condition of quantitie Durand. 4. Dist. 10. q. 2. Vbicunque est substantia in se realiter, ibi est substantialiter, quia est ab ea, iste modus inseparabilis, ergo [...] vbi­cunque est quantitas in se realiter, ibi est [...], quia iste modus est ipsi essentialis & inseparabilis, sed illud quod est quantitatiue alicubi, non potest comparari ad totum, vel [...] partem consimiliter..

And whereas to elude so manifest Veritie, Papists flye to the Omnipotencie of God Bellarm. d. Eu­char. lib. 1. cap. 14., saying, That although in na­ture it be impossible for one and the same bodie to be in ma­ny places at once; yet because God is omnipotent, hee is able to effect it. Wee answer, first, it implyeth a contradicti­on, D That God should destroy the nature of a thing, the na­ture of the same thing remaining safe. Secondly, wee say with Tertullian Tertul. lib. c. Prax. Dei velle posse [...], & non posse nolle., The power of God (which we must stand of) is his Will, and that which he Will not, he cannot. And S. Augu­stine August. d. Ci­uit. Dei, lib. 5. cap. 10. Dicitur omni­potens, faciendo quod vult, non pa­tiendo quod non vult, vnde propre­rea E quaedam, non potest, quia est omnipotens., Christ is said to be omnipotent, in doing what he Will. No­thing is impossible to God, because it exceedeth his power (saith S. Ambrose Ambros. lib. 6. ep. 37. Quia ergo ei impossible: Non quod virtuti arduum, sed quod naturae [...] contrarium. Impossibile istud, non [...], sed virtutis, & maiestatis, quia veritas non recipit mendacium, nec Dei virtus, leuitatis errorem.) but some things are repugnant to his Will, and some things to his veritie, Tit. 1. 2. And the impossibilitie of these things proceedeth not of Infirmitie in God, but of Might and [Page 182] Maiestie, because his Truth admitteth no Lye, nor his Power any A Inconstancie.

Because therefore Christ hath a true and perfect Bodie, both in regard of substance and matter, and also in respect of quan­titie Occhagania, d. Sacram. tr. 1. d. Eu­char. q. 20. Quan­titas debet comi­tati corpus Christi, vbicunque sit. Ex­tensio localis est propria passio quā ­titatis. Ex vi ver­borum constituitur corpus organicum. Quaeret aliquis qui fieri possit, vt mo­dus ille extensio­nis localis, quem corpus Christi ha­bet in Coelo, re­uera insit in cor­pore Christi, & à corpore reipsa, non seperetur (vt cer­tum sane est) & tamen non sit cum corpore Christi in Eucharistia?, stature, measure, posture, proportion, &c. and because euerie true humane bodie, by the Ordinance of the Creator, (who hath formed and constituted the seuerall kinds and na­tures of things after a speciall manner) is determined to one indiuiduall place at one instant Siluestran. in 4. Sent. Lect. C 27. Vbi vnica substantialis essentia, & vnicum vbi, &c. Durand. 4. Dist. 10. q. 2. Si quantitas corporis Christi est in Sacramento per concomtantiam ad substantiam, non apparet possibile, qualiter ipsa tota possit esse [...] praesens speciebus, & cuilibet parti specierum. Petigian. in 4. Dist. 10. q. 2. ar. 1. Si corpus Christi potest esse Sacramentaliter praesens multis locis, ergo omnibus, ergo vbique: si autem de fide est crea­turam non posse esse vbique non solum est secundum praesentiam quantitatiuam, sed etiam secundum quam­cunque praesentiam realem, etiam indiuisibilem & Angelicam, nam etiam de [...] spirituali creata, erit de fide, non posse esse vbique alioquin ex illa proprietate, non colligeretur diuinitas filij & Spiritus Sancti., and must also haue distinction and diuision of parts, with a length, latitude, and thicknesse proportionall to the quantitie thereof: Therefore, except B God himselfe had expressely reuealed, and testified by his Word, that the contrarie should be found in the humane bo­die of Christ, and that the same should haue one manner of corporall being in Heauen, and another in the holy Eucha­rist, at one and the same time; a Christian cannot be com­pelled to beleeue this Doctrine, as an Article of his Creed, vpon the sole Voyce and Authoritie of the Laterane or Tri­dent Councell.

Some learned Papists confesse ingeniously, That secluding the Authoritie of the Church, there is no written Word of God Scotus, 4. Dist. 11. q. 3. Camerac. 4. q. 6. ar. 2. Licet ita esse non sequa­tur euidenter, ex Scriptura. Caietan. 3. q. 75. ar. 1. Non apparet ex [...] a­liquid, &c. sufficient to enforce a Christian to receiue this Do­ctrine: D And moderne Pontificians are not able to confirme their present Tenet (to wit, That Christs humane bodie may be in many vbities or places at one time, and that the whole bodie of Christ is circumscriptiuely in Heauen, and accor­ding to the manner of a Spirit Bellarm. d. Eu­char. lib. 1. cap. 2. & cap. 14. Non habet Christus in Eucharistia, [...] existendi corporum, sed potius Spirituum. Ibidem, lib. 3. cap. 4. [...] si quis contendat esse in loco tam [...] quam [...], id requirere vt res nullo modo sit alibi, dicere possumus dari tertrum modum existendi in loco, [...] per solam. [...], quomodo Deus est in loco, & hoc modo in loco [...] ea corpora, quae per Diuinam po­tentiam, [...] sunt in [...] locis. Ochagauia, d. Sacram. tr. 1. d. Euchar. q. 22. Deus est vnus, & tamen est E totus [...] locis. Ibid. 4. 21. Christus existit in hoc Sacramento, quemadmodum Angelus existit in loco. [...]. in 4. d. 10. q. 1. Disp. 32. Sect. 5. Corpus Christi non est in Eucharistia, per modum quantitatis, sed potius per modum substantiae, Angelo potius accommodatum quam quantitati., and of the Diuine nature it selfe, without extension of parts, in euerie crumme of the [Page 183] Sacramentall formes.) This Doctrine (I say) Papals are not A able to confirme, by the vnanimous Testimonie and Tradition of the antient Church. Therefore because the same is groun­ded, neither vpon Scripture nor Tradition, they begge the question, when they alleadge Gods omnipotent power: for it must first of all, and that vpon infallible Principles appeare, That God will haue it thus; before his omnipotencie be plea­ded [...] 4. Dist. 10. q. 1. ar. 5. In illa Angelica enunciatione non erit impossibile apud Deum omne verbum, id duntaxat significari videtur, quod B nihil, quod Deus dixerit se facturum, est illi impossibile. Petig. 4. Dist. 10. q. 1. ar. 3. Caietan & Soto dicunt, quod, &c. Non est sermo de impossibili, secundum diuinam potentiam absolute, sed secundum potentiam ordinatam, secundum quam attenditur possibile velimpossibile, in Ecclesiasticis Mysterijs., that he is able to make it thus.

But the Iesuites Sophisme, whereby hee would intangle vs within the snares of fundamentall Errour, when wee denie Christs bodily presence in many places at once, proceedeth in this manner:

No bodie can be truely receiued in many places at once, vnlesse the same be corporally present in many places at once.

The Bodie of Christ is truely receiued in many places at C once, to wit, in euery place where the holy Eucharist is admi­nistred. Ergo:

The Bodie of Christ is present in many places at once.

I answere: The Maior Proposition is denyed; for there is a twofold manner of true Presence, and consequently of Re­ceiuing: one Naturall, by the hand and mouth of the bodie: D Another Mysticall and Spirituall, by the deliuerie of the holy Ghost, and by the apprehension and action of the soule.

First, The holy Ghost truely and verily reacheth and pre­senteth the Obiect, which is Christs Bodie and Blood, cruci­fied, and offered in Sacrifice for mans Redemption.

d Euseh. Emissen. d. Consecrat. dist. 2. ca. Quia corpus. Cum reuerendum [...] caelestibus cibis [...] ascendis, sacrum Dei tui corpus, & sanguinem fide respice, honora, mirare, mente continge, cordis manu [...], & maxime haustu interiore assume. Secondly, The reasonable soule being eleuated by a liuely and operatiue Faith, apprehendeth and receiueth the former obiect, as really, verily, and truely, after a spirituall and su­pernaturall manner, as the bodie receiueth any corporeall or sensible obiect, after a naturall manner, Iohn 1. 12. Ephes. 3. E 17. Fulgentius Fulgent. d. [...]. & Grat. c. [...]. saith, Filium Dei vnicum per fidem recipiunt: They receiue the onely Sonne of God by Faith. Our Sa­uiour saith, That holy Beleeuers receiue the Flesh, and drinke the Blood of Christ, Iohn 6. 50, 53, 54. Credendo, by [Page 184] [...] August. sup. Ioh. tr. 25. Vt quid paras dentes & ventrem, crede & manducasti. Ibid. tr. 26. Credere in cum, hoc est man­ducare panem vi­rium. Qui credit in [...] manducat, in­uisibiliter sagina­tur. Jb. Qui man­ducat intus non fo­ris, qui manducat in corde, non qui premit dente., v. 35.47. Paschasius Paschas. d. corp. & sang. Dom. c. 11.12.14. Spiritualiter sanguis potatur in mysterio. Totum spirituale est quod comedimus. Virtus fidei & intelligen­tiae, quae nihil de Christo dubitat, to­tum illud spiritua­liter sapit & degu­stat. hath these words, The A flesh and blood of Christ, &c. are truely [...] by Faith, and vn­derstanding. It is not lawfull to eate Christ with teeth. This Sacra­ment is truely his flesh and his blood, which man eateth and drin­keth spiritually. [...] saith, Hold readie the mouth of thy Faith, open the iawes of Hope, stretchout the bowels of Loue, and take the Bread of life, which is the nourishment of the inward man. Eusebius Emisenus Fulbert. Epist. ad Adeodat. [...]. Colon. to. 11. pa. 4. [...] fidei, dilata fauces spei, viscera charitatis extende, & sume panem vitae, interioris hominis alimentum, &c., When thou goest vp to the reuerend Al­tar, to bee filled with spirituall meates by Faith, behold, honour, and wonder at the sacred Bodie and Blood of thy God, touch it with thy minde, take it with the hand of thy heart: and chiefly prouide, B that the inward man swallow the whole. Saint Ambrose Ambros. praec. in praepar. ad Missam., Come­dat te cor meum panis Sancte, panis viue, panis munde, veni in cor meum, intra in animam meam: Let mine heart eate thee, oh holy Bread, oh liuing Bread, oh pure Bread, come into my heart, enter into my soule. Saint Augustine August. sup. Psal. 103. Conc. 3. Est alius panis qui cor confirmat, quia panis est [...]., There is ano­ther Bread which confirmeth the heart, because it is the Bread of the heart. And in another place August. serm. d. corp. & sang. Dom. citatur à Beda 1. Cor. 10.16. Vita vnicuique erit corpus & [...] Christi, si quod in Sacramento visibiliret sumitur, in ipsa veritate spiritualiter manducetur, spiritualiter bibatur., Then is the Body and Blood of the Lord life to each man, when that which is visibly taken in the Sacra­ment, is in very truth spiritually eaten, spiritually drunken. C

Now from the former Testimonies, it is manifest, that the Bodie and Blood of Christ, may truely and really bee D eaten and receiued, by operatiue Faith in the Sacrament.

And if it bee further obiected, That spirituall eating and drinking of the Bodie and Blood of Christ, may bee without the Sacrament:

I answere, That the same is more effectually and perfectly accomplished in the Sacrament, than out of the Sacrament: because the holy Ghost, directly, and in speciall, when the Sa­crament is deliuered, exhibiteth the Body and Blood of Christ, as a pledge and testimonie of his particular loue towards euery worthie Receiuer; and the liuely representation and comme­moration E of Christs death and Sacrifice, by the mysticall signes and actions, is an instrument of the Diuine Spirit, to apply and communicate Christ crucified, and to increase and confirme the Faith, Charitie, and pietie of Receiuers.

[Page 185] Lastly, It is remarkeable, that vntill the thousand yeeres, A and more, after Christs Ascension Petigian. in 4. Sent. d. 10. q. 1. ar. 1. p. 353. Constat ex Ecclesiasticis Histo­rijs & ex his quae colliguntur ex sa­cris Concilijs & Doctrina Patrum per mille annos & amplius à passione Domini, nulla fuit excitata Haerefis in Ecclesia circa realem praesentiam, &c., Orthodoxall Christians beleeued, that the Bodie and Blood of Christ were truely and really present, and deliuered to worthie Receiuers, in, and by the holy Eucharist, according to S t. Pauls Doctrine, 1. Cor. 10.16. And that the same must be spiritually receiued by Faith, or else they profited nothing August. sup. Ioh. tr. 27. Hoc est ergo manducare illam escam & illum bibere potum, in Christo manere & illum manentem in se habere. Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, & in quo non maner Christus procul dubio non manducat spiritualiter carnem eius, nec bibit eius sanguinem licer carnaliter & visibiliter premat Dentibus Sacramentum B corporis & sanguinis Christi sed magis tantae rei [...] ad iudicium sibi manducat, & bibit, quià immun­dus praesumpsit ad Christi accedere Sacramenta quae aliquis non digne sumit nisi qui mundus est..

But the manner of Presence (which some Modernes now obtrude) by Consubstantiation, or by Transubstantiation, was not determined as an Article of Faith Aug. sent. prosp­citatur à Bandino. sent. pag. 367. Si modum queris quo id fieri possit breuiter dico mysterium fidei salubriter credi potest, inuesti­gari non potest. Cyril. in Ioh. lib. 4. cap. 13. Firmam fidem mysterijs adhibentes, nunquam in tam sublimibus rebus, illud quomodo aut cogitemus, aut proferamus. Ibid. c. 24. Quomodo id fiat, nec mente intelligere, nec lingua dicere possumus, sed silentio & firma fide id suscipimus..

And (to say nothing of Consubstantiation, the defence C whereof, inuolueth them in many absurdities, which vnder­take for it) it is apparant, that Transubstantiation is a bastard plant, and vpstart weed, neuer planted by the heauenly Fa­ther, but the same sprang vp in the declining state of the Church, and it is perplexed and inuolued with so many ab­surdities and contradictions to Veritie formerly receiued; that our Aduersarie was transported with partiall folly, when he presumed to ranke the refusall of this new Suar. sup. 3. Tho. d. Euchar. disp. 50. sect. 2. pa. 602. Corrigendos esse Scholasticos qui hanc Doctrinam de conuersione hac, seu de Transubstantiatione non admodum antiquam esse dixerint. Inter quos fuit Scotus. Dist. 10. q. 1. § Quantum ergo ad istud Argum. & Dist. 11. q. 3. Gabr. lect. 41. in Can. and prodigious Article, among fundamentall Errours. D

IESVIT.

EIghtly, Their denying the Sacrament of Penance, and Priestly Absolution, the necessarie meanes for remission E of finnes committed after Baptisme.

ANSVVER. A

THe Obiector, by Penance, vnderstandeth not Repentance, as it is a vertue (for Protestants beleeue true repentance, to be a second Table after spirituall Ship-wrecke [...]. ep. 8. & ep. 47. & sup. Esa. ca. 3. Tertul. d. Poen. c. 4. Ambros. ad virg. Laps. c. 4., and a necessarie meanes of remission of sinnes committed after Baptisme Caluin. Instit. li. 3. c. 3. n. 1. Nō abs re summa Euange­lij statuitur in poe­nitentia & remissi­one peccatorū. [...]. [...]. Epist. 20. Viam & antegressionem esse dicimus ad petendum & percipiendum Christi beneficium. Zanch. d. Relig. c. 18. Thess. 1. Credimus ad veram Iustitiae Christi participationem, coquè ad [...] cum Christo ne­cessariam esse poenitentiam, qua à peccatis & mundo muratione animi, ac voluntatis auersi, ad Christum conuer­tamur, illi agglutinemur, ecquè [...] peccatorum in ipso & ex ipso consequamur, iusticiaquè ipsius & San­ctitate [...]. Marc. 1.4, 15. Luc. 13.3.5.) but he speaketh of Auricular Confession, accor­ding to the Tenet of the Trident Councell, and priestly Ab­solution vpon the same, affirming (but without any proofe) that this kind of penance, is a Sacrament of the Gospell, and a ne­cessarie B meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes committed after Baptisme.

The Protestants, in their Doctrine, acknowledge that priuat confession of sinnes, made by penitent people to the Pastours of their soules, and particular absolution, or speciall applicati­on C of the promises of the Gospell, to such as be penitent, are profitable helps of vertue, godlinesse, and spirituall comfort.

The Augustane confession August. Con­fess. d. Confess. Nàm & nos confessionē retinem' praecipuè propter absolutio­nem quae est verbū Dei, quod de singu­lis authoritate di­uina, pronunciat po testas clauium, qu are impium esset ex Ecclesia priuatā absolutionem tolle­re, nequè quid sit remissio peccatorū aut potestas [...] intelligunt, si qui priuatam absòluti­onem aspernantur. Harmon. Confess. sect. 8. Chemnic. Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 2. pa. 221. Priuata vero absolutio annunciat vocē Euan­gelij per quam non dubium est Deum efficacem & peccata [...] illis qui vocem Euangelij in absolutione fide apprehendunt. In absolutione igitur Deus ipse per Ministerium [...] elij [...] peccata singulis creden­tibus atquè hoc modo [...], testimonium est diuinae absolutionis, vndè conscientia testimonium habet sibi verè a Deo [...] esse peccata. speaketh in this manner: We retaine confession, especially because of absolution, which is Gods word, applied to euerie priuate person; therefore it were an vngodly thing to remooue priuate absolution out of the Church: neither do they duly consider, what is remission of sinnes, or the force of the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, which contemne or repudiate priuate absolution. A reuerend Bishop D. [...] BB. of Cou. & Liechf. protest appeal. li. 2. ca. 16. sect. 1. E of our time, deliuereth the Doctrine of our Church in this manner: The power of absolution in generall D and particular, is professed in our Church, where both in the publicke seruice is proclaimed pardon and absolution vpon all penitents, and a priuate applying of absolution vnto particular penitents, by the office of the Minister. And concerning priuat confession, Bishop Iuell Iuel. Def. Apolog. 2. p. c. 7. Diuis. 2. pa. 192. Zanch. d. Oper. Red. p. 757. Petr. Martyr. loc. [...]. Class. 3. c. 8. §. 28. Gerhard. loc. com. tom. 3. d. Poen. n. 99. Priuata coràm Ecclesiae [...] confessio, quam auricularem vocant, quam­uis non habeat expressum acspeciale mandatum, ac [...] non sit absolutae necessitatis, tamen cum plurimas praestet vtilitates paulo post enumerandas, ac disciplinae Ecclesiasticae pars sit non postrema, publico Ecclesiae consensu recepta, ideo nequaquam temerè vel negligenda, vel abroganda, sed piè, ac in [...] Dei timore, praeser­tim ab illis qui ad sacram Synaxin. accedunt vsurpanda. saith, Abuses and errors being remooued, and the Priest being lear­ned, we mislike no manner of confession, whether it be publicke, or pri­uate. [Page 187] His most excellent Maiestie, our gratious and religious A king Iames, in his Meditation vpon the Lords Prayer, hath these words, For my part with Caluin (Institut. lib. 3. cap. 4. Sect. 12.) I commend Confession, euen priuately to a Church-man, and I wish with all my heart it were more in custome among vs than it is, as a thing of excellent vse, especially of preparing men to receiue the Sa­crament.

The difference then betweene Papals and vs, in this questi­on, is not about the thing it selfe, considered without abuses Cassand. Con­sult. ar. 11. Credo de hac re controuersi­am nullam fuisse futuram, si non sa­lutatis haec confitendi medicina, ab imperitis & importunis medicis, multis inutilibus traditiunculis infecta, & contaminata fuisset, quibus conscientijs quas extricare & leuare debebant, laqueos iniecerunt, & tanquàm tor­mentis quibusdam excarnificarunt. Quaproptèr [...] rei occuretur, si pij tantùm, &c. Beat. Rhenan. sup. Tertul. d. [...]. praef. Thomas ab Aquino, & Scotus homines nimium arguti, confessionem hodie talem rediderunt, vt Io­hannes [...] grauis ac sanctus Theologus, qui [...] annis argentorati concionatus est, apud amicos suos [...] testatus sit, iuxtà illorum deuteroseis, impossibile esse confiteri. Concil. Colon. d. Poen. so. 158. Interim tamen non probamus hanc Exomologesim, hominum spinis & scrupis sic [...], vt vix quisquam à Sacerdote discedat tran­quilla conscientia, quam magis veterum exemplo expediri conuenerat., but concerning the manner, and also the obligation and neces­sitie thereof. B

First, they require of all persons, being of age, a priuate and distinct confession of all and euery knowne mortall sinne, open and secret, of outward deed, and inward consent Concil. Trid. Sess. 14. c. 5. Canon. 4. & Can. 7. Opor­tere à [...] bus omnia peccara mortalia, quorum post diligentem [...] discussionem, con­scientiam habent in confessione re­censeri, etiàmsi oc­cultissima illa sint, & tantum a [...] duo vltima Deca­logi praecepta com­missa, &c., together C with the circumstances Pre­tereà eas circumstantias, &c. quae peccati speciem mutant, &c. Nauar. Enchir. c. 2. thereof, though obscene and odious to Christian eares, to be made at the least annually Ibid. Can. 8. & Extr. d. Poen. & Remiss. c. 12. Omnis [...] sexus. to some Roman Priest authorised Trid. Concil. ibid. ca. 7.. And they affirme the same to be simply necessarie, either in act, or in desire Ibid. ca. 4. Reconciliationem ipsae contritioni sine Sacramenti voto, quod in illa includitur, non esse ascribendum., by diuine pre­cept Ibid. c. 6. Ad salutem necessariam esse iure diuino. for the obtaining remission of sinnes committed after Baptisme. And they teach, that this confession, and absolution vpon it, is one of the proper Sacraments Ibid. Can. 1. Si quis dixer it in Catholica Ecclesia, poenitentiam non esse ve­re & proprium Sacramentum, &c. of the New Testa­ment, hauing an operatiue vertue, to conferre Grace, and to change Attrition Ibid. ca. 4. Medin. Cod. d. Confess. tr. 2. q. 39. Multorum sententia est, & probabilis, quod sine contricione, possit quis absolui modo attritus sit. [...]. Addit. ad. 3. par. Tho. q. 6. ar. 1. Dub. 1. Cum confessione sufficit [...] ad iustificationem. Guil. Rubeo. 4. Dist. 18. q. 1. Confitens de peccatis suis, modicum dolens, per sacramentum poenitentiae sibi ministratum à Sacerdote eum absoluente, consequitur re­missionem culpae., or imperfect sorrow for sinnes past, into contrition. D

Secondly, our Tenet is, that auricular confession is not ab­solutely E necessarie to remission of sinnes after Baptisme, nei­ther is the same generally in respect of all persons Vasques. in. 3. to. 4. q. 90. ar. 1. dub. 1. n. 3. [...] Oxomensis D. Salmant. Docuit confessionem Sacramentalem, non esse in praecepto ijs qui iàm vere contriti à peccatis suis iustificati sunt., comman­ded [Page 188] or imposed by diuine law, and the rigorous vrging thereof A according to the Popish Doctrine Cassand. Con­sult. d. Confess. ar. 11 At quod, subijciunt enumerationē om­nium delictorū non esse necessariam, quadam ex parte recte habet, videlicet, si intelligatur de ignotis, & non occurrentil us pecca­tis: item si intelligatur de nimis anxia inquisitione omnium [...] quae in multis conscieniae carnifi­cinam gignit, quam nemo moderatus approbat. Concil. Colon. d. Poen. 10. 158. Non aliter [...] hanc confessionem necessariam, quam fecerunt veteres illi patres, hoc est, necessariam illis qui habent grauatam con­scientiam nimirùm quibus Concilio, consolatione & absolutione est opus., is not Orthodoxall or Ca­tholicke Faith: neither is penance a Sacrament of the new Te­stament, like vnto Baptisme, and the holy Eucharist.

The true ends of priuate confession are these which follow: First, to informe, instruct, and councell Christian people in their B particular actions. Secondly, if they be delinquents to re­prooue them, and make them vnderstand the danger of their sinne. Thirdly, to comfort those that are afflicted, and truely penitent, and to assure them of remission of sinnes by the word of absolution. Fourthly, to prepare people, to the worthie re­ceiuing of the holy Communion. And if priuate confession be referred and vsed to these ends, it is a worke of godly dis­cipline, consonant to the holy Scripture, and antiently practi­sed by the Primitiue Church Orig. in Luc. Hom. 17. Vnde & nos si peccauerim', debem' dicere, pec­catum meum no­tum feci tibi, & in­iquitatem meā nō abscondi, dixi an­nunciabo iniustici­am meam contrà me Domine: si e­nim hoc fecerimus, & reuelauerimus peccata nostra, non solum Deo, sed & his qui possunt me­deri vulneribus no­stris atquè peccatis, delebuntur peccata nostra ab eo qui dixit. Ecce delebo vt nubem iniquitates tuas, & sicut caliginem peccata tua. Idem. in Psalm. 31. Fortassis (inquit) sicut hi qui habent inclusam intus escam indigestam, aut humoris aut flegmatis, stomacho grauiter & molestè conuenientia, si vomuerint releuantur, ità etiàm fi qui peccauerunt, siquidém retinent in se peccatum, intrinsecus vrgentur, & propemodum suffocantur à flegmate vel humore peccati, si autem ipse sui accusator fiat, dum accusat semetipsum, & confitetur, simul euomit & delicta, at­què omnem morbi digerit causam. Hieron. sup. cap. 10 Eccles. Si quem serpens Diabolus occultè momorderit, & nullo conscio eum peccati, veneno infecerit, si tacuerit qui percussus est, & non egerit poenitentiam, nec vulnus suum fratri, & magistro voluerit confiteri, magister qui linguam habet ad curandum facilè ei prodesse non pote­rit. Si enim erubescat aegrotus vulnus medico confiteri, quod ignorat medicina non curat. Aug. sup. Psalm. 66. Tu­am iniquitatem confitere, gratiam Dei confitere, te accusa illum glorifica te reprehende, illum lauda, vt & ipse ve­niens inueniat te punitorem tui, vt exhibeat se tibi saluarorem tuum. Quid enim time tis confiteri, qui [...] hane viam in omnibus gentibus. Quid timetis confiteri, & in confessione vestra cantare canticum nouum, cum omni terra. In omni [...] in pace Catholica confiteri times Deo, ne confessum damnet? Si non confessus lates, E non confessus damnaberis. Times c̄ofiteri, qui non confitedo esse non [...] occultus, damnaberis tacitus, qui pos­ses liberari confessus.. Bishops and Ministers of the Church are Sheepheards, Stewards, and Ouerseers of Gods C people committed to their charge, 1. Pet. 5. 1, 2. Acts 20. 28. They haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen, and power to loose and bind sinners, Math. 16. 19. Math. 18. 18. Iohn 20. 23. They haue power to direct and gouerne their whole flocke, and euerie sheepe and member of the same, in things concerning their Saluation. The people are subiect to them, in such offices and actions as concerne their spirituall state, Heb. 13. 17. 1. Thess. 5. 12. And if Christian people must confesse and acknowledge their faults one to another, Iames 5. 16. then also when there is cause, why should they not do the same to the Pastors of their soules Caluin. Instit. lib. 3. c. 4. n. 12. Cum omnes mutuò nos debemus [...], & in fiducia diuinae misericordiae confirmare, videmus tamen Ministros ipsos, vt de remissione peccatorum, certas reddant con­scientias, testes eius ac sponsores constitui. Officij sui vnusquisquè fidelium esse [...], &c. vt ad se subleuan­dum priuata confessione apud Pastorem suum vtatur. Sistant se pastori oues, quoties sacram coenam participare volunt.? D

[Page 189] But the precise and strict Law of Confession, imposed vpon A all Christians as a necessarie meanes of remission of sinnes Francis. Sil­uius. Com. in 3. par. Tho. d. Confess. q. 6. ar. 1. De necessitate praecepti, non potest esse dubium. Illo autem supposito, dicendum est quod necessaria [...] necessitate [...], quià non est aliud remedium, consequendi veniam peccatorum mortalium à Baptismo commissorum, quam per confessionem Sacramentalem re vel voto [...]. Nugnus. [...] 3. part. Tho d. Poen. q. 6. ar. 1. Dub. 2. Con­fessio [...] ad salutem [...] medij, pro his qui [...] post Baptismum., is neither commanded in the New Testament, nor hath warrant from the Primitiue Church.

First, It was not instituted, or practised, Matth. 3. 6 Bellar. d. Poe­nit. li. 1. ca. 11. Resp. Poenitentiam quā Christus & Bapti­sta praedicarūt, ideo Sacramentum non fuisse, quià desinit pars Sacramenti potissima, [...] verbum absolutions, confessioni peceatorum adiunctum. Non habemus exē ­plum Sacramenti poenitentiae, in Actis Baptistae, & antè Christi resurrectionem. Suares. in 3. [...]. 4. disp. 35. sect. 1. Sed haec & fimilia [...] se sumpta, solum probant, generalem necessitarem [...], & indifferentia sunt ad poenitentiam requisitam, antè vel post Baptismum vt sensit [...] Concil. Trid. Sess. 14. c. 1.: for that Confession was before Baptisme, and not at the Sacrament of Penance; and so great a multitude, as is mentioned in that B Text, could not within so smal space of time make speciall enu­meration of all their sinnes, and no priuat absolution was vsed.

Secondly, It cannot be prooued from Act. 19. 17. because this Confession was open, and not secret; the same was volun­tarie, and not commanded; it was performed once onely, and C not annually, or often euerie yeere, and no Absolution was gi­uen after it. And Cardinall Caietan Caietan. sup. Act. 19. Quemad­modum ad Baptis­mum Iohannis cō ­currebant confiten­tes peccata sua (vt dicitur Marci primo) ita modo describuntur confitentes facta sua, procul dubio in genere aut publice. [...] enim fuit confessio Sacramentalis, sed professio poenitentiae, vitae praeteritae. graunteth, that it was no Sacramentall Confession, but onely an open profession of their former wicked life.

Thirdly, It was not appointed, Iam. 5. 16. For our Aduer­saries acknowledge, That it is not certaine that S. Iames spea­keth D of Sacramentall Confession Caietan. sup. Iam. 5. Non hic est sermo de Sacramē ­tali confessione vt patet ex eo quod dicit, confitemini inuicem, Sacramē ­talis enim confessio non fit inuicem, sed Sacerdotibus tantùm, sed de [...] qua mutuo fatemur, nos peccatores vt oretur pro nobis, & de confessione hinc inde erratorum pro mutua [...] & reconciliatione. Scot. 4. Dist. 17. q. 1. [...]. 1. Gabr. 4. Dist. 17. q. 1. Vasques. in 3. tom. 4. q. 90. ar. 1. dub 1. nu. 26. Quamuis Hugo. vict. & [...]. d. Confess. Sacra­mentali illum locum intelligunt, tamen non est ità concors sententia, multi enim alij de confessione quae inui­cem fieri debet inter fratres vt [...], [...]. Myth. [...] 4. [...]. [...]. Nequè enim consentaneum E videtur, confessionem Iacobum promul asse, in [...] illis [...] alterutium peccata vestra. Yrebarn. 4. dist. 17. Dico praeceptum confessionis non haberi ex asserto Iacobi. Aureolus. 4. dist. 17. q. vnic. Ad [...] illam Iacobi dicendum est, quod loquitur de mutua obligatione, qua [...] est obligatus, ad [...] alteri, de offensa., Rhemists, Iam. 5. Annot. 10. And the persons to whom S. Iames commands Confession to be made, are not onely Priests ( [...], Confesse, or ac­knowledge your faults one to another) but also any other person, whom one hath wronged and offended, or from whom he may receiue counsaile, or comfort.

Fourthly, Neither was Sacramentall Confession instituted, [Page 190] Ioh. 20. 23. because no mention is made in that Text of auri­cular A Confession. And the power granted to Ministers of the Gospell, to apply remission of sinnes, by Preaching, Sacra­ments, and Absolution, may be exercised, and also be effectuall in contrite people, vpon the inward confession of sinnes to God himselfe, and their liuely faith in Christ Iesus, and vpon their Baptisme, Act, 3.19. & 26.18. Matth. 11.28. without priuate disclosing and manifesting their secret offences to man.

If the Aduersaries shall obiect, None can forgiue sinnes by a iudiciall Act, vntill they know them, and haue them reuealed. But Priests, by commission from Christ, forgiue sinnes by a iudiciall Act; B and therefore sinnes must by confession, bee reuealed and made knowne vnto them. I answere, That hee which properly and directly pardoneth sinnes by a iudiciall Act, ought to know them; and thud God himselfe forgiuing sinnes, knoweth them, Psal. 69.6. But they which forgiue sinnes declaratiuely Lombard. 4. dist. 18. [...]. Non hoc Sa­cerdotibus conces­sit, quibus tamen tribuit potestatem soluendi & ligandi, id est oftendendi homines ligatos, vel solutos. In soluendis culpis vel retinendis ita ope­ratur Sacerdos E­uangelicus, & iudi­cat [...] olim lega­lis in illis qui con­taminati erant le­pra, quae peccatum signat. Ambros. d. spir. sanct. li. 3. ca. 19. Peccatum nemo condonat, [...] vnus Deus. Homines in remissione peccatorum Ministerium suum exhi­bent, non ius alicuius potestatis exercent. Neque enim in suo, sed in Patris & Filij & Sp. Sancti nomine pecca­ta dimittuntur; isti rogant, Diuinitas donat. [...]. [...]. Ioh. 20. Vis & efficacia Remissionis, non in Discipulis D sed in Deo remitrente., and by publish­ing Gods iudiciall Act, like as a Cryer pronounceth the sen­tence of a Iudge, and by applying the Word and Sacraments to penitent persons (vpon the holy and worthie receiuing whereof, the holy Ghost himselfe conferreth the grace of Re­mission) may performe that which belongeth to their office, C without distinct knowledge of all the particular sinnes, where­of the penitent person hath repented himselfe in the sight of God Medin. Cod. d. poenit. tr. 2. q. 2. Saepissime Deus [...] peccata antequam à [...] remitrantur. Quamprimus, Quis intus de peccatis propter Deum conteritur, etiamsi de confessione vocali nil sciat nihilque memoriae eius occurrat; illico consequitur à Deo, remissionem omnium mortalium. Ochagania. d. Sacram. poenit. tr. 2. q. 1. Ex praedicto loco Scripturae Ioh. 20 Aliqui sic colligunt necessitatem con­fessionis, quia Sacerdotes ibi [...] iudices, & per consequens debent cognoscere causam, &c. Verum hac ra­tione non potest colligi necessitas confessionis, &c. Sacerdotes sunt Iudices Ordinarijrespectu poccarorum ve­nialium & tamen non est preceptum [...] confitendi.: as appeareth in Baptisme, and generall Confession, ioy­ned with Contrition. And when a Priest applyeth the word of Absolution, hee knoweth not whether the person confes­sing his sinnes, performeth the same truely, and with contrition of heart, or not.

Iohn Medina Medin. ibid. E­sto quod illinc col­ligeretur necessitas confitendi Sacerdotibus non tamen ostenditur quod fit necessarium in partitulari singula confiteri, etiam occulta cordis peccata, quod peccator in genere se peccatorem coram Sacerdote esse cognos­cat E & confiteatur, & ab ipso Sacerdote, ita in genere absoluatur., Cardinall Caietan Caietan. sup. Ioh. 20. Fateor institu­tionem Sacramenti poenitentiae, hic non habere praeceptum., and Iansenius Iansenius Harm. Euang. cap. 147. Quo­niam Remissio peccatorum impendi potest sine praeuia confessione illa speciali, ex [...] quod Sacerdotibus hoc [...] potestas est collata remittendi aut retinendi peccata, non mox consequitur specialem peccatorum confes­sionem esse necessariam., acknow­ledge [Page 191] the weakenesse of this Argument, to prooue Auricular A Confession. And Vasques saith, That a man can hardly find, a­mong those which maintaine Auricular Confession, out of the place of Ioh. 20. 23. which doe effectually conclude the same from thence Vasques, 3. to. 4. q. 90. ar. [...]. Dub 2. Inter alios qui pla­ne fatentur ex illis verbis Ioh. 20. Ne­cessitatem Confes­sionis, [...] inuenies qui efficaciter inde deducat.. Ioh. Medina treating of Auricular Confession, saith Medin. Cod. d. Poen. [...]. 2. q. 2. Ad huius [...] pro­bationem [...] Doctores [...] insudarunt., The Romane Catholike Doctors haue laboured till they sweat againe, to find proofe for this veritie: He might well haue said, They la­boured to as good purpose, as the man who sought to finde Nodum in Scirpo, or, A Needle in a Bottle of Hay. Mich. Pa­lacius Palacius, 4. Dist. 17. pag. 240. Auxij sunt admodum Theologi in inuestigandis [...] locis, aut [...] rationibus, qua hoc esse iuris Diuini euincant. Et miratu dignum, quanta sit de hac re concertatio, quamque sibi male conueniant. saith, Diuines are perplexed in finding places of Scrip­ture, or other conuincing arguments, to prooue Auricular Confession B to be of Diuine Institution; and it is worthie admiration, what con­tention is about this matter, and how badly Authors agree concer­ning the same.

Our Aduersaries labour tooth and nayle, to prooue from the former Text in S. Iohn, That Priests exercise a Iudiciall C Power, when they absolue sinners. But if this were graunted, they gaine nothing, for this Iudiciall power is exercised, ac­cording to the word of Christ: And if that word absolue contrite and penitent persons, vpon internall Confession to God himselfe Chrysost. in Psal. 50. [...]. 2. Quia ex animo poenituit, &c. con­fessus est Deum, esse Christum, me­ruit Paradisi, esse Colonus. Ibid. Pec­cata tua dicito, vt [...] illa. Si con­funderis [...] di­cere quia peccasti, dicito ea quotidie in [...] tua, non dico vt confitearis conseruo tuo vt exprobret, dicito Deo qui curat [...] Ibid. Reminiscons [...] effunde lachry­mas, & poteris in lecto tuo positus, ea delere. Chrysolog. Serm. 84. [...] Petrus (Acts 2.) peccata, & toto cum gaudio [...] poenitentes., and vpon their generall Confession before men, without secret Confession; then it followeth not, That because a Priest exerciseth a Iudiciall power, when hee absol­ueth, Ergo, Penitents must confesse all their knowne sinnes. A penitent person may haue mortall sinnes, which he remem­breth not, Psal. 19.13. and when vpon profession of his repen­tance D he is absolued, those sinnes are pardoned Paludan. 4. d. 17. q. 2. n. 8. Culpa mortalis, non potest remitti sine noua infusione [...]: Sed confessio Sacram. [...] valet ad [...]: quia ex quo homo facit quod potest, confitendo [...] in speciali de [...], & in generali de [...]: Absolutio sequens, ab omnibus [...], [...] Praecessit [...]., Psal. 103.3. and the Priest, in giuing Absolution, exerciseth a Iudiciall Act (according to the Popish Tenet) and yet those finnes are not disclosed, or manifested vnto him.

Secondly, The present Romish Doctrine, concerning the E absolute necessitie of Auricular Confession, is not Catho­lique. The Greeke Church, both of antient and later times, [Page 192] reiected the same, as appeared by Nectarius [...]. Hist. Ec­cles. l. 5. c. 19. [...]. li. 7. c. 16. Trip. Hist. li. 9. c. 35. Niceph. li. 12. c. 28. [...]. d. Sacram. poe­nit. tr. 2. q. 1. nu. 12. Res haec multu fa­cessit negotij The­ologis nostris. Qui­dam fatentur Hi­storiam veram esse. [...]. [...]. Th. Wald. Mych. Palacius. Quidā negant La­tinus Latinius no­mine: breuem dis­putationem edidit Romae, anno 1587. vt ostenderet hanc Socratis Historiam fabulosam esse, quod meo iudicio nullo firmo funda­mento docet. Refert Vasques 3. to. 4. q. 90. ar. 1. Dub. 3., S. Chrysostome Chrys. sup. Heb. Hom. 31. & sup. Psal. 59. & Hom. 5. d. In­comprehensib. Dei naturae., A and by the testimonie of learned Papists, which affirme the same, concerning that Church. The Glosse vpon Gratian, saith Gloss. d. paenit. Dist. 5. c. 1. Necessaria est confessio in mortalibus apud nos, apud Graecos non, quia non emanauit apud illos Traditio talis., Auricular Confession is not necessarie among the Grecians. Greg. Val. Lib. 2. d. Miss. cap. 4. saith, That Panormitan and Gerson maintained, that secret Confession was not necessarie. An­dreas Vega Vega. d. Iustif. li. 13. c. 28., Very many learned Catholikes haue doubted of this necessitie of Confession, by Diuine Law. Maldenat. Mald. sum. q. 18. ar. 4. Suares. 3. to. 4. Disp. 35. Sect. 1. De hac confessione est tertia sententia extremè contraria, quae negat in lege gra­tiae C datum esse à Christo Domine proprium Diuinum praeceptum huius confessionis, quam sententiam non so­lum docent Haeretici, &c. Sed etiam graues Theologi. Hugo Victor. Alex. Halens. Bonauentura, &c. Cum negent confessionem esse expresse institutum a Christo a fortiori negant esse praeceptam. sum. q. 18. ar. 4. There be also among Catholikes, which thinke there is no Diuine Precept touching Auricular Confession, to wit, all the Interpreters of the Decrees, and also Scotus. B. Rhenanus Rhenan. in Tertul. d. paenit. Praefat. and Petrus Oxomen­sis B Refert Alphons. Castro. v. Confess. Vasques. 3. q. 90. ar. 1. Dub. 1. denyed the said Confession to be of Diuine Institution. And Gratian Grat. d. Poen. d. 1. cap. 89. Quamuis. Quibus Authoritatibus vel quibus rationum firmamentis vtraque sententia satisfactionis & confessionis innitatur, in medium breuiter exposuimus. Cui autem harum potius ad­haerendum sit. Lectoris iudieio reseruatur. Vtraque enim, fautores habet sapientes, & Religiosos. [...]. sup. 5. lib. Decretal. d. Poen. & Remiss. cap. 12. Omnis vtriusque, n. 18. Multum mihi placet illa opinio (Gloss. Gratian. d. Poen. dist. 5.) Quia non est aliqua authoritas aperta quae innuat, Deum seu Christum, aperte institu­isse, confessionem fiendam Sacerdoti, pag. 256. himselfe hauing disputed the Question pro & con, concludeth in this manner, I leaue it to the Readers choyse, which opinion to follow, because each opinion (to wit, the one holding Confession to be of Diuine Institution, and the other Ecclesiasticall) hath fautors, both wise and religious.

Now if Auricular Confession is not certainely and infalli­bly of Diuine Institution, then it is impossible for the same, D conioyned with Absolution, to be a Sacrament; because Sa­craments of the New Testament were immediately instituted by Christ, and haue their institution, matter, forme, visible signes, and promises, expressely and manifestly deliuered and appointed in the Scripture of the New Testament. From hence I argue:

If that which Romists tearme Sacramentall Penance, haue no word of Institution, no visible and corporeall Element August. sup. Ioh. tr. 80. Accedat verbum ad Ele­mentum & fit Sa­cramentum. Ibid. Visibile verbum. Idem, c. Faust. lib. 19. cap. 16. Visibilia inuisibilis Gratiae signa. Idem, Serm. d. Bapt. ad Neophyt. Sacramentum dicitur, quia aliud videtur, aliud intelligitur. Quod videtur, habet speciem corporalem, quod intelligitur habet fructum spiritualem., no expresse forme, or word of Consecration, neither any Sacra­mentall E [Page 193] effect appropriated vnto it by Christ and his Apostles; A then the same is no Sacrament of the New Testament.

But all and euerie of these Conditions are wanting in Popish Penance: Ergo,

The same is no Sacrament of the New Testament.

If Penitencie be not affirmed by the Fathers of the Primi­tiue Church to be a Sacrament properly taken; then, that the same is such in our dayes, is not Catholique Doctrine. But B learned Pontificians haue narrowly searched euerie Sentence of Antiquitie concerning Penitencie, and cannot yet produce one place, where the same is plainely and expressely affir­med to be one of the Sacraments of the New Testament, properly taken, to wit, such as is Baptisme, and the holy Eu­charist.

Therefore the present Doctrine of Romists, concerning Penitencie, That the same is a Sacrament, is neither groun­ded vpon the Scripture, nor the perpetuall Tradition of the Church: And our Romish Aduersarie is the eight time C August. Confess. lib. 10. cap. 3. Quid mihi est cum ho­minibus, vt audi­ant confessiones meas, quasi ipsi sa­naturi sint omnes languores meos? Curiosum genus ad cognoscendam vitam alienam, desidiosum ad cor­rigendam suam. guided by a lying Spirit, when he accuseth vs of fundamen­tall Error, because wee denie Popish Penance to be a Sa­crament.

IESVIT.

NInthly, Their denying the Catholique Church, ex­pressely D set downe in the Creed, which of all the other Articles, is with greatest danger denyed: For the standing out against this, makes men Heretikes; and without er­ring against this, no man is guiltie of Heresie: whatso­euer Doctor Field to the contrarie saith, That an errant against a fundamentall point, is an Heretike, though hee erre without pertinacie, whereof he brings not any sylla­ble E of proofe. And yet his Doctrine is against the whole consent of Diuines, and expressely against S. Augustine, Aug. d. Bapt. c. Don. lib. 4. ca. 6. [ It should be, ca. 16.] who saith, That a man holding with Photinus, whose [Page 194] errors were most fundamentall, against the Trinitie A and the Godhead of Christ, thinking hee holds Catho­lique Doctrine, is not yet an Heretike, till warned that hee holds against the Catholique Church, hee chuseth to perseuere in his error.

ANSWER.

WEe beleeue stedfastly the Article of the Apostles Creed, concerning the Catholique Church; and de­nie B onely the false sense, which Romists impose Stapl. Relect. contr. 4. d. potest. Eccles. q. 3. ar. 2. in Symbolo profite­mur, Credo Ecclesiam [...]. &c. Hoc est credo omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam [...] docet. Canus, Loc. [...]. lib. 4. cap. 4. Bannes, 2.2. q. 1. ar. 1. pag. 10. [...], sum. pag. 237. Omnis Baptisatus sanctam Ec­clesiam explicite tenetur credere, scil. quod sit verax & infallibilis, in proponendis nobis ea, quae sunt fidei, Rhem. 1. Tim. 3. Sect. 9., and the absurd inferences which they draw from this Article.

And whereas the Iesuit affirmeth, That this Article is with greatest danger denyed, because the standing out against it, makes men Heretikes, &c. Both the Proposition it selfe, thus C rawly and confusedly deliuered, and the Confirmation, are false.

The Article of the Catholique Church, is not the most fundamentall and prime Article of the Creed; for many other Articles are, about a more principall and excellent Obiect, to wit, immediately concerning God the Creator, and Christ Iesus the Sauiour and Redeemer, and God the Holy Ghost, &c. whereas the Obiect of the Article in question, is concer­ning the Creature.

The prime foundation of Christianitie, is Christ himselfe, D 1. Cor. 3. 11. 1. Pet. 2.6. The Church is the seruant, and Spouse of Christ, the House of God, whereof Christ him­selfe is the grand Lord, and Builder. But wee haue learned in the Gospell, That the seruant is not greater than his Lord, Ioh. 13. 16. Hereupon S. Augustine, Enchyrid. cap. 56. Good order requireth, that the Church be placed after the Trinitie, as an House after the Inhabiter, his Temple after God, and the Citie after the Founder August. En­chir. cap. 56. Rectus ordo poscebat, vt Trinitati subiungeretur Ecclesia, tanquam habitatori [...] sua, & Deo Templum suum, & E conditori Ciuitas sua..

And if the Aduersarie replie, That although it be a lesse Article, in regard of the Obiect; yet the denyall thereof is [Page 195] of greater consequence, because it maketh men guiltie of He­resie, A &c.

I answere, Granting that the denyall of the whole Arti­cle, being rightly expounded, maketh men Heretickes: but I denie, that a Christian which beleeueth this Article is no Hereticke Bellarm. d. Pon­tif. li. 4.7. Pontifex si posset esse haereti­cus, solum erit ne­gando aliquam ve­ritatem antea defi­nitam. Non potest, autem esse haereti­cus, dum ipse ali­quid noui definit, tunc enim non [...] contra aliquid definitum ab Ec­clesia., if hee beleeue and maintaine any Errour, a­gainst the plaine Doctrine of the holy Scripture, which hee knoweth, or which hee is bound, Necessitate [...], or [...], to know, beleeue, and maintaine. Saint Hierom, vpon the Gala­thians, saith Hieron. sup. Gal. c. 5. [...] Scripturas ali­ter intelligit, quam sensus spirit' Sancti flagitat quo con­scripta est, licet de Ecclesia non recesserit, tamen Haereticus appellari potest., Whosocuer (to wit, in waightie points) vnder­standeth the Scriptures, otherwise than the sence of the holy Ghost B whereby they were written, requireth, may bee called an Hereticke, al­though hee depart not out of the Church. Tertullian saith Tertul. d. vel. virg. c. 1. Quod­cunque C aduersus veritatem sapit, hoc erit Haeresis., What­soeuer (in points Diuine and Sacred) is repugnant to Veritie, is Heresie. Albertus saith Albert. 4. Sent. Dist. 13. ar. 39. Ille est Haereticus, qui sententiaru suam sequitur & non sententiam Scripturarum., Hee is an Hereticke, which followeth his owne opinion, and not the iudgement of the Scripture. Occham Occham. Dial. p. 1. l. 1. c. 6. Haereticus est, qui per­tinaci auimo tenet aliquam Haeresin, cuius contradictoria in Sacris [...] continetur., Hee is an Hereticke, which with a pertinacious minde imbraceth any Errour, the contradictorie doctrine whereof, is contained in holy Scripture.

Two things, constitute an Hereticke: First, Errour and false Doctrine, as the materiall. Secondly, Malicious and pertina­cious adhearing to the same, or defending the same, as the for­mall. A man may haue both these, without any explicite de­nying the Article of the Catholicke Church. For the Trueth which hee gainesayeth, may be plainely deliuered in the holy D Scripture, and hee may reade the same, and haue sufficient meanes to know it in the Scripture, and maliciously or inordi­nately resist the holy Ghost, speaking by the Scriptures: Act. 7.51.

e Cyprian. Ep. 75. [...] differentia est, inter pseudo propheram, & hae­reticum. Our Sauiour condemneth some for Heretickes; calling them false Prophets, Murtherers, and Theeues, Mat. 7.15. Ioh. 10.5. Not because they opposed the present Church; for some of these were principall Rulers of the Iewish Church, Mat. 23.1. but because they taught and beleeued contrarie to the Scrip­tures, Mat. 22.29.

Saint Augustine Aug. d. Bapt. c. Don. lib. 4. cap. 16. Constituamus ergo duos aliquos isto modo, vnum eorum verbi gratia, id sentire de Christo quod Photinus opi­natus est, & in eius Haeresi baptizari extra Ecclesiae Catholicae communionem: alium vero hoc idem sentire, [...] in Catholica Baptizari, existimantem ipsam esse Catholicam fidem. Istum nondum Haereticum dico, nisi manifestata sibi Doctrina Catholicae fider [...] maluerit, & illud quod [...] elegerit, quod antequam fiat, manifestum est illum, qui foris baptizatus est esse pejorem. d. Bapt. c. Don. li. 4. c. 16. speaketh not E [Page 196] altogether as the Iesuit [...] him: but saith onely, That hee A would not affirme of such a person, who being baptised in the [...] Church, beleeued as Photinus the hereticke did, supposing the same to be Catholicke Faith, that he was an he­reticke: he absolutely affirmeth not, that such a person was no Hereticke, but that hee would not pronounce him an Here­ticke, before hee was conuicted. And hee speaketh of Here­tickes, not as they were in foro coeli, according to the iudge­ment of God; but in foro Ecclesiae, according to Ecclesiasti­call Censure. Neither doth hee speake of persons, sufficient­ly conuicted by plaine euidence of holy Scripture, and mali­ciously B and inordinately resisting the Truth; but of simple Er­rants, misled and seduced, through ignorance or infirmitie. Doctor Field, (whose learned Treatise of the Church, is D. Field. 3. Booke of the Church. c. 3. nibbled at by Papists, but yet remaines vnanswered by them) is censured by this Obiectour, for saying, without any Proofe, that an Errant against a fundamentall point, is an Hereticke, though he erre without pertinacie.

But the Iesuit reporteth amisse, when hee saith Doctor Field deliuered this Assertion without Proofe; for in the Mar­gine of his Booke he confirmeth the same, by the testimonies C of Gerson Gerson. to. 3. d. Consol. li. 4. pros. 1. pa. 53. Dubius in fide infidelis est? Quod vtique veri­tatem habet, dum quis illa dubitat, quae per eruditio­nem sacrae Scrip­turae, certa tenetur & explicata [...] tenere. and Occham Occham. Dial. p. 1. l. 4. c. 3. Quidam sunt nescientes Haeretici, qui assertionem nullam pertinentem ad fidem Christianam sub propria forma Scriptam in Scriptura diuina re­pertam dubitant esse veram, quia [...] Scripturam diuinam recipiunt: Sed tamen [...] assetriones sequen­tes ex illis, propter hoc, quod aliter intelligunt Scripturas diuinas, quam sensus Spiritus Sancti flagitat, à quo D sumptae sunt, non credunt esse veras, quià non putant quod sequantur ex illis, quià autem credunt irreuocabili­ter contrarias assertiones esse veras, ideo Haeretici sunt censendi qui tamen in genere credunt totam fidem Chri­stianam esse veram. Idem. p. 2. tr. 1. ca. 10. Haeretici sunt in duplici differentia, quidam sunt scientes Haeretici, qui­dam sunt Haeretici non scientes, &c. Errantes contra fidem Christianam aberrant, Ipso facto, & hoc [...] dupliciter: quià aut errant contra [...] quam tenentur explicitè tenere vel credere: sicut si quis assentiret [...] non fuisse [...], putans hoc ad fidem Christianam minimè pertinere. Ibid. Errans contrà fidem debit [...] per regulam fidei Christianae, qui ergo regulam fidei putat falsam, non est paratus [...], igitur est [...] Secundo ex verbis praedictis concluditur quod errans contra veritatem Catholi­cam, quam [...] credere, est Haereticus reputandus: quià talis non quaerit cauta sollicitudine veritatem., two famous Doctors of the Roman Church. And it is remarkeable, that the Iesuit censuring the Doctour, himselfe produceth no Argument out of diuine Au­thoritie, to confirme his owne Position, but resteth onely vpon the single testimonie of one Father, which (as I haue alreadie shewed) speaketh not to his purpose.

IESVIT. E

Hence Jinferre, that Protestants erre fundamentally, according to the second kind of erring, to wit, in the man­ner, in all points they hold against the Romane Church, [Page 197] which I haue prooued to be the true Catholicke Church. For A he that holds any priuate opinion so stiffely, as rather than forsake them, he denyes and abandons the Catholike Church, a mayne Article of his Creed, erreth fundamentally, as is cleare. But Protestants hold their priuate opinions so stif­ly, as thereupon they haue denied and abandoned the Catho­licke Church, to wit, the Romane.

ANSWER. B

The mayne Proposition of this Section, to wit, Protestants [...] fundamentally, according to the second kinde of erring, &c. is denied: and the Assumption of the Syllogisme, whereby the Obiectour laboureth to prooue the same, is palpably vntrue. For Protestants maintaine no priuate opinion, either stiffely or remissely, whereby they haue denied and abandoned the true Catholicke Church.

First, They maintaine no doctrine as matter of Faith, but that which is deliuered in holy Scripture, and which consen­teth C with the Primitiue Church, either expresly or virtually. But such doctrine is not priuate opinion, because the holy Ghost, which is the supreame gouernour and directour of the Church, and the Prophets and Apostles which were inspired from heauen, are the Authours thereof.

Secondly, The Romane Church is not the Catholicke Church, but an vnsound part of the generall visible Church, as it is prooued by the Learned of our part D. Rainold. [...]. sex. Thes. Rom. Ec­clesia nec Catho­lica est nec sanum membrum Catho­licae D Thes. 5., whereunto the Ad­uersaries haue, as yet, made no replie.

IESVIT.

Neither doth it import that they retaine the word, ha­uing reiected the sence, seeing not the letter of the Creed pronounced, but the matter beleeued makes men Christians. Neither is it enough to say, that they beleeue the Church of the Elect, seeing the Church of the Creed, is not the Church of the onely Elect (a meere fancie) but the visible and E conspicuous Church, continuing from the Apostles by suc­sion of Bishops, which thus I prooue.

ANSWER. A

d Origen. in Math. tr. 1. Si quis fuerit ad­uersus D quem praeualiturae sint portae inferorum, talis nequè Petra fuerit, super quam Christus aedificat Ecclesi­am, nequè quae à Christo super Petram aedificatur Ecclesia, &c. Ibidem. Vbi vero considerauimus, quod vnum quodquè peccatorum ob quae Christus iturus erat ad inferos, portae sunt inferorum, compraehendemus, quod anima quae maculam habet, aut rugam, aut aliquid huiusmodi, ac propter malitiam nec sancta est, nec irrepre­hensibilis, ea neque Petra est, super quam Christus aedificat, nequè Ecclesia, nequè Ecclesie pars, quam super Pe­tram Christus aedificat. Ambros. in Luc. lib. 2. c. 3. Bernard. in Cantic. serm. 78. D. Rainold. d. Script. & Eccles. Thes. 4. confirmeth the same at large. We retaine both the words, and the sence of the Article, and the Catholicke Church in the Apostles Creed, in respect of the militant part thereof, is a Church of right beleeuers, and especially of iust and holie persons, and principally and in­tentionally, and as it comprehendeth both the militant and tri­umphant, the congregation of all the elect; for this Church is the mysticall and liuing bodie which Christ saueth, Ephes. 5. 23. It is the Church of the first borne, which are written in B Heauen, Heb. 12.23. It is the Church builded vpon the Rocke, against which the gates of Hell shall not preuaile Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, li. 20. c. 8. Nun­quam ab illo, Ec­clesia seducetur, praedestinata & e­lecta antè constitu­tionem mundi., either by Haeresie, Temptation, or mortall Sinne Origen. tr. 1. in Math. Vnūquod­què peccatorū, &c. portae sunt infero­rum, vna inferorū porta, vocatur scor­tatio. Cum multae sint, neque recen­seri numero possint inferorum portae, nulla porta infero­rum, valet aduersus Petram, aut Eccle­siam quam Chri­stus super illam ae­dificat. Hieron. sup. Math. c. 16. Ego portas inferi reor, vitia atquè peccata, vel certè Haereticorum Doctrinas, &c., Math. 16. 18. & Math. 7.24. And if it be a meere fancie to hold this, then Gregorie the Great Gre. Mor li. 4. ca. 11. Quid per dies nisi singulae quae (que) Electorum mentes? Quid per menses nisi multiplica­tae eorū Ecclesiae quae vnam Catholicam faciunt, designatur. Jd li. 28. c. 6. Sanctam Ecclesiam de sanctis in aeter­num permansuris constructam, nuliis huius vitae persecutionibus superandam, Ipse super quem aedificata est, eui­dentèr ostendit, cum ait portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersus eam., with many other of the antiēt Fathers were fantasticks for teaching in this manner. But the Church of the Creed is not alwaies the Church Hierarchicall: for the Church in the Apostles Creed is that societie of Beleeuers, against which Hell gates preuaile not finally, either by Heresie or mortall sinne. But Hell gates preuaile against Popes and Popish Prelats by mortall sinne, so farre, as that they descend into the infer­nall C lake. Therefore the Roman Hierarchicall Church consi­sting principally of Popes and Popish Prelats, is not the holy Catholicke Church in the Creed, for that Church hath re­mission of sinnes, and life eternall, and passeth not into Hell, Ioh. 10.28. August. d. Doctr. Christ. li. 3. ca. 32.

IESVIT.

The Church whereof Christ said, Math. 28.20. I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world, is the E Church of the Creed, or the Church, which to forsake is damnable. For the Church wherewith Christ still abi­deth, not according to corporall and visible presence, but by [Page 199] his Spirit, is the body of Christ, whereof he is head, into A which he infuseth the life of Grace: and consequently, he that forsaketh this Church, forsakes the body of Christ, the head thereof, and cannot liue by his Spirit, but is in a dead and damnable estate, as a member cut off, and seperated August. Epist. 50. d. Vnit. Eccles. c. 16. from a liuing bodie, as S. Augustine long ago noted. The Catholicke Church is the bodie of Christ, whereof he is head, out of this bodie the holy Ghost quickeneth no man. Now the Church whereof Christ said, I am alwaies with B you to the consummation of the world, is not the Church in­uisible of onely the Elect, but a visible Church deriued by succession from the Apostles: therefore hee that forsakes this Church deriued by succession from the Apostles, for­sakes the Church of the Creed, the Catholicke Church, the bodie of Christ, and puts himselfe into a dead and dam­nable state, and may haue all things besides Saluation and eternall Life, as Fathers affirme, whose testimonies in this Aug. Com. [...]. Con­cion. de Emerito ad Plebem. Lact. lib. 4. Diuin. Institut. ca. vlt. Cyp. epist. 62. ad Pompon. Field li. 1. of the Church, ca. 23. behalfe are notable, and famously knowne, whereunto D. C Field yeeldeth, acknowledging One, Holy, Catholicke Church, in which only the light of heauenly Truth is to be sought, where only Grace, Mercie, remission of Sinnes, and hope of eternall Happinesse are found.

ANSWER.

The Church whereof Christ said, Math. 28.20. I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world, is the Church of the D holy Apostles, & of Pastors and Beleeuers succeeding them in the same Faith and Religion: and this is a principall part (for the Catholicke Church in generall containes all Faithfull and iust persons, from Abel Aug. Enchir. c. 56. & [...] 61. Idem. sup. [...]. & sup. Psalm 90. Gregor. Moral. li. 4. c. 10., &c.) of the Church in the Creed. Secondly, some part of the Catholicke Church of the Creed, is alwaies visible in the world, sometimes in an ampler, some­times in a smaller number of Professours. Also the visibilitie thereof, is at sometimes illustrious and notorious, and at other times it is obscure, according to the state of Persecution Whitaker. d. Ecclesia cap. 2. q 3. [...]. non omni­bus quidem, sed ijs tantum, quibus­cum rem habent, & qui rectè de religi­one iudicare possūt.. Thirdly, to forsake the true Church in the maine and pri­marie E Articles of Faith, or by any wilfull infidelitie, is dam­nable: and all people which desire Saluation, must actually (if it be possible) or Voto, in case of necessitie, conioine themselues to some part of the Orthodoxall Catholicke Church Read before pa. 7.50.61..

[Page 200] But our Sauiour promised to no one visible Sea or Church, A continuing after the Apostles by succession of Bishops, abso­lute immunitie from all Errour, and infallibilitie of Veritie; but only presentiall assistance, and protection of. Grace, suffici­cient for the saluation of his people, vpon condition, to wit, when the said Pastours taught and obserued that which he commanded, and continued in the right vse of those meanes which he had deposed among them, Ioh. 8.31, 32. Rom. 11. 22. Read before in this Treatise, pag. 94.99.

The Testimonies of S. Augustine Aug. epist. 50. Idem. d. vnit. Eccles. ca. 16. obiected by the Ad­uersarie, which are, That the Catholick Church, is the body of B Christ, whereof he is head: and that out of this bodie, the holy Ghost quickeneth no man, make altogether against him­selfe; for none are vitall members of Christs mysticall body, but iust and holy persons. And it is the same Fathers doctrine Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. li. 3. c. 32., Impij non sunt reuera Corpus Christi, wicked persons are not in deed and veritie Christs bodie. And in another place, In corpo­re Christi non sunt quod est Ecclesia, quoniam non potest Christus ha­bere membra damnata Idem. sup. ep. Ioh. tr. 3. & in psal. 131. In hijs est do­mus Dei, quos prae­destinauit, & prae­sciuit perseueratu­ros. Et in Psalm. 47. Proefat. Secundam Sabbathi non de­bemus intelligere, nisi Ecciesiā Chri­sti: sed Ecclesiam Christi in sanctis, Ecclesiam Christi in hijs qui scripti sunt in Coelo, Ecclesiā Christi in hijs qui mundi huius tentationibus non cedunt., They are not in Christs bodie, which is the Church, because Christ cannot haue damnable members. C And Bernard Bernard. in [...]. 1. saith, Manifestum est, non esse Caput Hypochritae Christum, It is euident, that Christ is not the head of an Hypo­chrite. But the visible Rulers of the Popish Church haue many times bin (as our Aduersaries themselues report) not only Hy­pochrites, but apparantly monstrous and damnable sinners Read before pa. 5.57. 111.112.113., therefore they are not the Catholicke Church, out of which no Saluation can be had Aug. c. Crescon. lib. 2. c. 21. Omnia ista monstra, absit omni­nò D vt in membris illius columbae vnicae [...], absit vt intrare possint limites horti conclusi, cuius ille custos est, qui non potest falli., neither is perpetuall influence and assistance of Grace absolutely intailed vpon them.

Out of the former premises, I argue thus:

Wolues, Hipochrites, and impious persons are not the holy Ca­tholicke Church of the Creed, out of which there is no Saluation.

Romish Prelats haue beene Wolues, Hypocrites, and impious men, for they haue maintained false and superstitious Doctrine, repugnant to the holy Scripture, and aduerse to the Faith of the Primitiue Church (which Protestants haue, and are againe E readie to demonstrate) and they haue beene most notorious, for all kind of abhominable vices (as Romists themselues haue pub­lished to the World) and they haue also most iniustly and tyrani­cally Read before in this [...], pag. 111. 112.113. persecuted and oppressed true beleeuers, Ergo,

[Page 201] Romish Prelats are not the holy Catholicke Church of the A Creed, out of which there is no Saluation.

Argument 2. Out of the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed there is no Saluation. Read before in this Treatise, pag. 1.2.

Out of the fellowship of the Roman Church there hath beene, and is Saluation. Ergo

The present Roman Church is not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed.

And thus the Obiector hath gained nothing by accusing our Church of fundamentall error, and his nine Accusations B are prooued to be so many calumniations: and we neither erre fundamentally in any maine Article, nor yet pertinaciously or maliciously against any other Christian veritie. For although whiles we liue in the world, tenebras huius mortalitatis circumfe­rimus, Aug. d. Tem. serm. 237. (as S. Augustine speaketh) we carrie about vs (in regard of our selues) the darkenes of mortalitie, tamen ad Scripturae lucer­nam ambulamus, yet we studie carefully to walke according to the true light of holy Scripture, and God hath hitherto so as­sisted vs, that the euill eye of our Aduersaries, is not able to dis­couer in our Doctrine any capitall Error: neuerthelesse, if vp­on C further inquisition, they shall make it appeare by diuine te­stimonie, or other sufficient proofe, that we are deceiued in any matter of Faith, small or great, we will be as [...] to reforme our selues, as they are readie to accuse vs. And in all differences betweene them and vs, we submit our selues to a free, lawfull, generall Councell, to be tried by the rule of Gods word; con­cerning which S. Augustine saith Aug d. Trinit. li. 3. ea. 11., Extat authoritas diuinarum Scripturarum, vndè mens nostra deuiare non debet, nec relicto solida­mento diuini eloquij, per suspitionum suarum abrupta praecipitari, There is extant, the sacred authoritie of diuine Scripture, from D whence wee may not deuiate, nor forsaking the infallible ground of Gods word, be carried into the precipicies of mens fancies. [...], (saith great Athanasius, Athan. orat. c. Gent. Greg. Moral. li. 18. c. 14. Si rectè loqui desiderāt, in­dè sumere debent, quid loquātur. Am­bros. Hexam. li. 2. c. 2. Nos [...] Scripturarum coe­lestium magifterio.) The sacred Scriptures, giuen by diuine inspiration, are all-sufficient of themselues, to the de­monstration of (sacred) verity. But a theefe (saith Chrisostome Chrys. in Ioan Hom. 58.) entreth not into the sheepfould by the testimonie of the Scrip­tures, which are called a doore, & that most iustly, because they leade vs to God, and manifest diuine knowledge to vs, they make vs Christs sheep, and preserue vs, so as wolues cannot rush E in vpon vs. But he that vseth not the holy Scripture, but climeth in some other way, that is a way not permitted, the same is a theefe. Now Protestants follow the Scriptures, and Romists enterby humane Traditions.

[Page 203] THE THIRD PART OF THIS TREATISE: Wherein the Iesuit disputeth Nine Questions, propounded by his MAIESTIE.

IESVIT. AN ANSWER TO THE Nine Points proposed by your most EXCELLENT MAIESTIE.

I Haue beene large in my for­mer D Proofes, That the Roman is the onely true Catholike Church, whose Traditions comming downe by per­petuall succession from Christ, and his holy Apostles, are so constantly and strongly to be beleeued, that no proofes out of Scripture (by priuate interpretation vnder­stood) though seeming most euident, may stand to contest against them. And this I haue done, not without purpose, E assuring my selfe, that if your Maiestie were thoroughly persuaded in this Point, you would (without any mans helpe) most easily and fully satisfie your selfe in particular Controuersies, out of your owne excellent Wisedome, and [Page 204] Learning. For as some that haue beene present at your A Maiesties discourses casually incident about Religion, re­port, few of our Diuines (though trayned vp continually in Academies, and Exercises of Theologie) are able to say more than your Maiestie, in the defence of the Catholique cause, for particular Controuersies, when you please to vn­dertake the patronage thereof, which I can easily beleeue out of my owne experience, who could not but [...], seeing your Maiestie so well acquainted with our Do­ctrines, B and so readie and prompt in Scholasticall sub­tleties.

Wherefore I most humbly beseech your most excellent Maiestie, to honour these my poore Labours with a gra­cious perusall of them, accepting of my Answeres, when they may seeme reasonable, being in defence of Doctrines receiued from Auncestors, which deserue approbation, when there is no euidencie against them: And out of C your abundant Clemencie, pardon my prolixitie; seeing the Questions by your Maiestie proposed, were so difficill and obscure, as I could hardly haue made any shorter full explication of them.

ANSVVER. D

YOu haue beene large and prolixe ( Nam quid est loquacius va­nitate? Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 5. cap. 27. Facile est cuiquam, videri respondisse, qui ta­cere noluerit. Aut quid est loquacius vanitate? Quae non ideo potest quod veritas, quia si vo­luerit etiam, plus potest clamare quā veritas. for what is more wordie, than Vanitie?) in depressing the sacred Scriptures, which are the Oracles of God himselfe, and ad­uancing the Customes and vsur­ped E Authoritie of the Romane Sect. Sed quis tam vanus, vt veritati consuetudinem praeferat? Who will be so mad, as to preferre Custome before Veritie? And [Page 205] whereas you glorie of the Pedigree of Romish Traditions, A pretending that they are descended by perpetuall succession from Christ, and his holy Apostles, and that the same ought so strongly and constantly to be beleeued, that no proofes out of Scripture (interpreted against your Tenet) though see­ming to be most euident, may stand to contest against them: Surely, there is hitherto nothing solid, or euident, produced by you, to confirme this Assertion; and therefore, Quae ista Cyprian. ep. 74. obstinatio est quae ve praesumptio, humanam traditionem Diuinae dis­positioni anteponere? What presumption and obstinacie is this, B to preferre humane Tradition before Diuine Ordinance August. d. Agon. Christi, cap. 28.? Ipsam fidem quae in Scripturis manifesta est, non vultis discere; You will not learne the right Faith, which is manifest in the Scripture August. sup. Psal. 32. Cypr. d. Laps. Alta & ere­cta Ceruix, nec quia cecidit infle­xa est, tumens a­nimus & superbus, nec quia victus est fractus est, iacens stantibus, & integris vulneratus minatur. Idem, Epist. 40. Qui mandatum Dei rejiciunt, & Traditionem suam statuere conantur, fortiter a vobis & firmiter respuantur. C. Nec remanet vobis, nisi sola infirmitas animositatis, quae tanto est languidior, quanto se maiores vires habere aestimat; Your onely support is, the infirmitie of an high, or ouer­weening stomacke, which is so much the more feeble, by how much it ouer-valueth its owne strength.

Hence proceedeth the assuring your selfe of successe, in persuading no meaner a Person than his most excellent Ma­iestie, to rellish your Superstition. But Saint Basil saith Basil. epist. 107. [...], Solo rore aluntur Cicadae, Grassehoppers feede wholly vpon deaw, and Ephraim feedeth vpon the Wind, Hos. 12. 1. His Maiestie is a Cedar Orig. sup. Num. Hom. 17. & sup. E­zech. Hom. 11. Ba­sil. sup. Psa. 28. Ho. 1. Hieron. Trans. orig. in Cant. Cedrus imputribile Lig­num. of Libanus, grounded on Veritie, established in the right Faith, one, which by reason of habit and long vse ( [...]) hath his senses exercised, to dis­cerne D good and euill, Heb. 5.14. [...] a Captaine of the Host of the Lord: Lex Dei in corde eius, The Law of God is in his heart, his foot can neuer slide.

It is therefore subtletie, rather than hope, which induceth you to vent these fond surmises, of his propension or incli­nation towards your part. For although such fancies are re­diculous to prudent men, yet they serue your turne, in being baits to delude and intrap the credulous, and incautelous, who commonly regard not what indeed is, but what in their owne fancie may be Cicero, pro Ros­cio. Ex opinione multa ex veritate pauca iudicant.. E

Lastly, whereas vpon fame, or hearesay, (which according to Tertullian Tertul. Apo­log. cap. 7. Report or Fame, is most an end false: and when it deliuereth some part of truth, it is not then free from the vice (or tincture) of vntruth., Plurimum mendax, & ne tunc quidem cum veri [Page 206] [...] adfert, sine [...] vicio est) you report, That his A Maiestie doth at some times shew his excellent Wisdome and Learning, in the patronage of your Catholike (Pseudo-Ca­tholike) Cause; you should rather haue made mention of that which is certaine, How often, and with what admirable soliditie, his Maiestie vndertaketh, by his Word and Penne, the confusion and demolishing of your Babylonian Cause. But were it so, that his excellent Maiestie should sometimes pro­pound and vrge your Obiections, for the better resolution of Points in question; there is as little reason to interprete this as a fauour to your Cause, as to construe some passages B of king Salomons Ecclesiastes, vttered by way of tentation in the person of Epicures [...]. Com. Eccles. cap. 3. [...], vt quidam interpretantur. Ibidem, cap. 7. [...] est, ex persona hominis [...], & [...]., to haue beene spoken seriously, in fauour of that wicked Sect.

THE WORSHIP OF IMAGES. A

IESVIT. B

[...] Haue more hope to giue your MA­IESTIE satisfaction in this Article, because all kinde of Theologicall Proofes stand for the same, and nothing against it, as I am persuaded, which I declare by this Discourse. C

ANSVVER.

YOu were no Loyalist, if you could not promise golden Mountaines Cyprian. Epist. 55. Arrogans & su­perba iactatio, non de Christi Magiste­rio sed de Antichri­sti spiritu naseitur.: but the Worship of Images, is a practise, so absurd in reason, and so repugnant to all diuine Authoritie, that, (to speake in Saint Augustines phrase Aug. d. ciu. Dei. lib. 17.) Non solum infi­deliter, D sed etiam infaeliciter & impudenter, &c. The defence thereof cannot be vndertaken, without infidelitie, impudencie, and vnluckie successe.

IESVIT.

If the custome of Worshipping Images, bee grounded on the prime Principles of Nature and Christianitie: If the same hath beene receiued in the Church, vniuersally, E without any knowne time of beginning: If places of Scripture that Protestants vrge against vs, make a­gainst their custome of making Images, so that with no [Page 208] probabilitie or ingenuitie, they thereupon mislike vs. if A by the vse of Images there bee no danger of hurt to igno­rant people, which may not with very ordinarie dili­gence of Pastours and Teachers be preuented, and other­wise the vtilities very great; then there is no reason of iust mislike of this custome. But this supposition is true, as in the same order I will indeauour to shew in the soure Particulars.

ANSVVER. B

This Aduocate of Imagerie, should first of all haue de­clared, what hee vnderstandeth by Worship of Images: whe­ther Veneration onely, largely taken; or Adoration, properly so called.

Veneration may signifie externall Regard and Reuerence of Pictures, such as is giuen to Churches and sacred Vessels, and to ornaments of sacred places; and according to this no­tion, many haue approoued or tollerated worship Nycen. Synod. 2. Act. 7. Epist. Tha­ras. Glossa. d. [...]. d. 3. c. Venera­biles Adorare, id est, Reuerentiam exhibere. Peres. Aial. d. Trad. p. 3. d. ven. Sanct. Distinguendo vocabula Adora­tionis & venerationis, vt isti Sancti distinguunt, nemo in Ecclesia dicit, qui [...] sentiat, Sanctos debere adora­ri, sed venerari. Junius. Animad. Bellarm. d. Imag. c. 11. n. 1. Bellarm. Non esse vllo modo colendas Imagines. Resp. Hoc [...] nostrum dicit, non esse colendas, nec vllo modo: suo modo coli probamus, [...] imagines, at non religioso cultu, qui aut superstitiosus est, aut impius, nec cum aliorum scandalo, siue cultus separatus, [...] coniunctus cum corum [...] intelligatur, [...] sunt imagines. of Images, which denie Adoration. C

Adoration properly taken (among Schoolemen [...]. [...]. [...]. 103. [...]. 4. Gabr. [...]. miss. lect. 49. [...]. 3. to. 1. Disp. 51. sect. 1. Signif. [...], quo vnus alteri [...], velillum ho­norat, in recogni­tionem excellentiae eius. Petigian. 3. d. 9. q. 1. ar. 2. Adoratio tres actus complectitur. 1. Actum intellectus, quo apprehendimus excellen­tiam alicuius. 2. Actum voluntatis, quo nos illi interius inclinamus, & aliquid volumus facere actu interiore, & exteriore, quo potestamur eius excellentiam, & nostram subiectionem. 3. Actum exteriorem, quo caput inclina­mus, velgenu flectimus, vel aliquid aliud signum subiectionis ostendimus, ex quibus actibus secundus, est maximè proprius & essentialis. [...]. in 3. q. 25. [...] 2. [...]. q. 5. dub. [...]. Cabrera in 3, q. 25. [...]. 1. comment. Tapia. in 3. q. 27. ar. 3. Vasques d. Ador. [...]. 1. disp. 1. c. 1. & l. 2. disp. 8. c. 8. n. 321. [...]. d. Sacr. Ador. cult. disp. 3. Sect. 7. [...]. Quaest. Schol. 7. ar. 1. Palac. [...]. [...]. [...]. disp. 1. E) signi­fieth a yeelding of honour to things Worshipped, by re­cognition of their dignitie and excellencie, and by reli­gious D submission of Bodie and Soule, to wit, by inward motion of the Will, and externall deedes and gestures of Honour, as Kneeling, Kissing, Censing, holding vp the hands, &c.

The worshipping of Images in this manner, by Religious Adoration [...]. d. Sacr. Ador. cult. disp. 3. sect. 6. n. 7. Imagines [...], sunt [...] adoratione sacra & religiosa, [...]. pa. 260. Suares. in 3. to. 1. disp. 52. sect. 3. Hic cultus, &c. [...] religiosus [...]. pa. 588., either primarie, or secondarie [...]. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 8. c. 8. n. 331., absolute or [Page 209] respectiue, is neither grounded on the prime Principles of Na­ture A and Christianitie, neither was the same practised by the antient Catholicke Church: But on the contrarie, it is a su­perstitious dotage, a palliate Idolatrie, a remainder of Pa­ganisme Cornel. Agrippa. d. vanit. scient. d. Imag. Qui quidem corruptus Genti­lium mos, & falsa religio, cum ipsi ad Christi fidem, conuerti caeperunt, nostram quoque religionem infecit, & in nostram Eccle­siam simulachra & imagines, multasque Pomparum steriles ceremonias introduxit, quorum nihil omnino fuit, apud primos illos Christianos. B, condemned by sacred Scripture, censured by Pri­matiue Fathers, and a Seminarie of direfull contention, and mischiefe in the Church of Christ.

First, The Scriptures of the Old Testament, are so appa­rantly against Adoration of Images, Exod. 20.5. Leuit. 26.1. Deut. 5. 9. Psal. 106. 19. Esay 2. 8. Mich. 5. 13. that the best learned Papists themselues, affirme the same to haue beene prohibited vnto the Iewes. Aquinas Aquin. 3. sent. dist. 9. q. 2. ad. 1. Pro­hibitum est in ve­teri lege, ne ima­gines fierent, ad a­dorandum. saith, The making of Images to bee worshipped, was prohibited in the Old Law. The same is affirmed by Alexander Hales Al. Hal. p. 3. q. 30. m. 3. ar. 3., Albertus Albert. 3. d. 9. ar. 4., Bonauenture Bonauent. 3. d. 9., Marsilius Marsil. 3. q. 8. ar. 2., Rich. Mediauilla Rich. 3. d. 9. q. 2., Gerson Gers. compend. tr. 2. d. 10. precept., Abulensis Abul. Exod. 20. q. 39.; and it is also the Tenet of many later Schoolemen Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 4. c. 6. n. 98. Respondeo lege veteri non fuisse [...] omnem similitudinem aut effigiem quomodocunque, sed omnem cultum & adorationem ipsius, atque adeo omnem quo­que imaginem seu effigiem modo accommodato adorationi erectam, aut constitutam. Soto. d. Iust. & iure. l. 2. q. 4. ar. 2. Cordub. li. 1. q. 5. du. 5. Palacius. 3. d. 9. Oleaster. sup. Exod. 20. Cabrera. 3. q. 25. Disp. 1. §. 5. Tapia. in 3. q. 27. ar. 8., to wit, Soto, Cor­duba, Cabrera, Palacius, Tapia, Oleaster, &c. C

Secondly, The brasen Serpent was a figure of Christ, Ioh. 3.14. The same was formed by Gods Commandement, Num. 21.9. And yet the worship thereof, being (as Vasques Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 4. c. 5. n. 91. Quando Eze­chias ipsum con­fregit, quod vide­ret ei incensum adoleri, cum tamen in solam memoriam preteriti beneficij a Deo accepti, in populo illo, seruare­tur: non ideo fecit, quia existimaret, a populo pro Deo iam coli, & adorari, sed quod aliquem cultum qualem [...] imaginibus deferre nos consueuimus, qui omnino erat populo illi prohibitus, videret ei adhiberi. Adole­bant enim illi incensum: nec aliam causam ob quam Ezechias ipsum confregit Scriptura nobis exposuit, at incensi Oblatio non est proprie Sacrificium soli Deo debitum, sed quae etiam rebus inanimis, aut imaginibus refertur. saith) no o­ther, than such as Romists vse towards their Images, was vn­lawfull, D 2. Kings 18.4. Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei. l. 10. c. 8. Dist. 63. c. Quia Ezechias, &c. Fregit serpentem aeneum quem fecit Moses, &c.

Thirdly, The Scriptures of the New Testament, neither expresly, nor by Consequent, maintaine the worship of I­mages. Neither is there in all the Apostles Doctrine, any E abrogation of the Negatiue Precept, deliuered to the Iewes, concerning the Worship of Images: And therefore the same Law is Morall, and obligeth Christians, as it did the Iewes.

[Page 210] Fourthly, the worship of Images was not practised, or held A lawfull by the Primitiue Fathers Cassand. Con­sult. d. Imag. & Si­mulachris. Quantú veteres initio Ec­clesiae, ab omni veneratione Imagi­num abhorruerút, declarat vnus ori­gines aduersus cel­sum, &c. has ideò I­magines nō hono­ramus, &c. Aug. d. Consens. Euang. li. 1. ca. 10 Et d. Mor. Eccles. Cathol. cap. 34. Noui multos es­se Sepulchrorum & Picturarum adora­tores. Et epist. 119. Nulla Imago eius coli debet, nisi illa, quae est hoc quod ipse. Ambros. lib. 5. epist. 31. Non vult se Deus in lapidibus coli. Idem. d. Obitu Theodosij, He­lena, Constantini mater, non adorauit lignum, quià hic Gentilis est error, & vanitas impiorum. Greg. Nissen. or. Funeb. placillae, pa. 290. Qui creaturam adorat, etiamsi in nomine Christi id facit, Simulachrorum cultor est. Clem. Rom. Recog. lib. 5. pag. 71. & 73.: And Gregorie the great Greg. lib. 7. epist. 109. Tua fraternitas, &c. ab [...] adoratu, populum pre­hibere debuit, & li. 9. epist. 9. Adorare Imagines omnibus modis deuita. Cassand. Consult. d. Imag. pa. 977., six hundred yeares after Christ, condemned the same. The Councel of Frankford Ro­ger. Houeden. Annal. part. 1. pag. 232. Col. 2. Carolus rex Francorum misit Synodalem librum ad [...], &c. in quo libro multa inconuenientia, & verae Fidei contraria, &c. maxime quod penè omnium orientalium Docto­rum non minus quam 300, &c. Episcoporum vnanima assertione confirmatum fuerit, Imagines debere adorati, C quod omnino Ecclesia Dei execratur., seuen hundred ninetie and foure yeres after Christ, opposed the definition of the second Nicen Sy­nod, concerning worship of Images (as besides more antient Historians Ado. Cron. aetat. 6. fol. 181. Sed & Pseudo Synodus, quam septi­mam Graeci appellant, pro adorandis Imaginibus abdicata penitus. Regino. Cron. lib. 2. fo. 30. Hincmar. li. c. Ian­dunens. Episc. c. 20. Septima autem apud [...] vocata vniuersalis, Pseudo Synodus, de Imaginibus quas qui­dam confringendas, quidam autem adorandas dicebant, neutra [...] pars intellectu sano definiens, sine authori­te Apostolicae Sedis non longè antè nostra tempora Niceae est à compluribus Episcopis habita, & Romam missa, quam etiàm Papa Romanus in Franciam direxit, vnde tempore Charoli magni Imperatoris, iussione Apostolicae Sedis, generalis Synodus in Francia conuocante praefato Imperatote celebrata, & secundum Scripturarum tra­mitem, traditionemquè maiorum, ipsa Grae corum Pseudo Synodus destructa est, & penitus abdicata, de cuius de­structione, non modicum volumen, quod in Palatio adolescentulus legi, ab eodem Imperatore, Romam est per quosdam Episcopos missum. Amoin. d. Gest. [...]. lib. 4. cap. 85. Abbas. Vesperg. Cron. Ann. 793. In these two lat­ter Authors, Amoinus and Vspergensis, the name of Constantinople is inserted for Nice, but in the matter they agree. Read Vasques. d. Ador. lib. 2. disp. 7. cap. 2. n. 213. Vero similius esteos (Amonium & Vspergens.) errasse in vno verbo, ponendo Constantinopolitanam, pro Nicena., Cassander Cassander. Consult. d. Imag. Cum in Synodo Nicena sub Constantino & Irene, de Imaginibus adorandis, aliquot decreta edita fuissent, atquè exemplar illius D Graecanicae Synodi Francofurtum, &c. allatū, & iussu Caroli diligentèr lectum fuisset, cui Synodo, etiàm Legati Romani Pontificis interfuerunt, summo Patrum consensu Graeca illa Synodus, qua parte Imagines adorandas censebat, improbata & damnata fuit, vt quae non modo diuinis literis, & antiquae Patrum Traditioni, sed etiàm consuetudini Romanae Ecclesiae aduersaretur, quae damnatio etiàm actis & capitibus illius Francofordiensis Synodi inserta fuit., and some other Pontificians affirme Genebrard. Cronol. li. 3. an. 794. Addo patres qui Francofurtum conuenerant, non sa­tis habuisse perspectam Nicenae sententiam, ac fuisse deceptos falsis rumoribus & scriptis..) Agobardus Agobardus. Bibli­oth. Patr. Edit. Colon. tom. 9. pag. 598. Nullus antiquorum Catholicorum, vnquam eas colendas vel adorandas for­tè existimauit. Ibid. Nemo se fallat, nemo se seducat, nemo se circumueniat: quicunquè aliquam Picturam vel Fusilem, siue ductilem adorat statuam, non exhibet cultum Deo, non honorat Angelos vel homines sanctos, sed simulachra veneratur. Ibid. Habuerunt namquè & antiqui Sanctorum Imagines vel pictas vel sculptas, sed causa Historiae ad recordandum, non ad colendum. the BB. of Lyons, who liued (as Ado saith) about the yeare 815, in his Booke de Picturis & Imaginibus, saith, That none of the antient Catholickes thought that Images were to be wor­shipped, or adored: and deliuering his owne iudgement, he saith, B Nemo se fallat, &c. Let no man beguile himselfe, whosoeuer worship­peth any Picture, or moulten or carued Statue, neither honoureth God himselfe, nor Angels or Saints, but Idols.

Fifthly, many latter Pontificians haue condemned the wor­shipping of Images (according as the same was practised by E the vulgar, and maintained by Aquinas and other principall Scholemen.) Holcoth saith Holcoth. in lib. Sap. cap. 13. pag. 524. Nulla adora­tio debetur Imagini, nec licet aliquam Imaginem adorare., No adoration is due to an Image, nei­ther is it lawfull to worship any Image. Cassander writeth in this [Page 211] manner Cassan. Consult. d. Pictur. & Imagi­nibus pag. 977. Sa­nioribus Scholasti­cis, displicet senté­tia [...], qui cé­seat Imaginem ea­dé adoratione co­lendam, qua res ip­sa colitur, quae [...] significatur, eamquè parum tu­tam esse aiunt, nisi commoda interpre­tatione subleuetur, in quibus est Du­randus & Robertus Holcot, Gabriel, quoquè Biel, sanio­tem sententiā red­fert eorum qui dicunt, quod Imago nequè vt consideratur in se, secundum quod lignum est, lapis, aut Metallum, [...] vt consideratur secundum rationem Signi & Imaginis, est adoranda. Gerson. Compend. part. 2. d. decem­praecept. Nos non adoramus Imagines, sed refertur honor & adoratio ad imaginatum. Guliel. Durand. Rational. Di­uinor. lib. 1. cap. 3. Ferus. sup. Iudic. ca. 8., The opinion of Thomas Aquinas, who holdeth, that Ima­ges A are to bee worshipped, as their Samplers, is disliked by sounder Scholemen; and they affirme, that the same is not very safe, vnlesse it be qualified with fauourable interpretation. Among these is Du­rand, and Holcoth. Gabriell Biel reporteth the opinion of them which say, that an Image, neither as it is considered in it selfe ma­terially, nor yet according to the nature of a Signe or Image, is to bee worshipped. Peresius Aiala saith Peres. d. Trad. pa. 3. d. Imag. Omnes ferè Scholastici in hoc sunt, quod imago Christi, & Sanctorum adorari debent, eadem adoratione qua & res quae & representantur. Ideò Imagini [...], & signo crucis sanctissimo, in eo quod Christum representāt, latriae adorationem illis deberi [...]. Cuius Doctrinae nullum (quod ego viderim) afferrunt validum fundamentum, quod posset fideles ad id quod do­cent obligare, nam nequè Scripturam, nequè Traditionem Ecclesiae, nequè communem sensum Sanctorum, ne­què C Concilij generalis determinationem aliquam, nèc etiàm rationem, qua hoc efficaciter suaderi possit, addu­cunt. Concil. Moguntin. cap. 41. & 42. Imaginum vsum velut pro erudienda plebe, & omnium animis excitandis vtilem, in Ecclesijs nostris retineri serio mandamus, dummodò Pastores nostri populum accuratè moneant, Ima­gines non ad id proponi vt adoremus aut colamus eas: sed vt quid adorare aut colere, aut quarum rerum vtili­tèr meminisse debeamus, per Imagines recordemur., All Scholemen (in a manner) hold, that the Image of Christ, and the Images of Saints are to be worship­ped with the same adoration, that their Samplers, but they produce (so farre as I haue seene) no sound proofe of this Doctrine, to wit, neither B Scripture, nor Tradition of the Church, nor common consent of Fa­thers, nor the determination of a generall Councell, or any other effe-Cuall reason sufficient to persuade Beleeuers.

Sixthly, the varietie of opinions, and the palpable discord among Pontificians, concerning the manner of adoring Ima­ges, their sandie and disjointed consequences, their forging and purging Authors, their knottie and labyrinthian distinctions, wherein they ambush themselues, and out face euident Truth; D are sensible arguments of corrupt and vnsound Doctrine, in this Article of adoration of Images.

IESVIT. §.1. Worship of Images, consequent out of the Principles of Nature and Christianitie.

AN Image is a distinct and liuely pourtraiture of some E visible and corporall thing, parts of the Jmage corre­sponding to the parts of the thing represented, more or lesse particularly, according as the Image is more or lesse distinct and liuely.

ANSVVER. A

c Alchasar. A­poc. 12. Bernard. serm. d. Virg. Maria. Signum magnū ap­paruit in Coelo, mulier amicta Sole & Luna sub pedibus eius, & in capite eius corona duodecem Stellarum. Til­man. Bredenbach. Collat. Sacr. lib. 3. cap. 23. Progressi sunt ad Imaginem B. Virginis [...], [...] Sole, & Lu­nam D sub pedibus habentem, ex laqueati Ecclesiae dependentem. Benzon. sup. Magnif. lib. 1. cap. 18. pag. 103. Core­na. B. Virg. Mariae, in Prolog. fol. 1. Osorius Conc. tom. 5. Dominic. Aduent. 2. pa. 16. THis definition may perchance agree to some Images [...]. Orig. lib. 8. ca. 8. Simula­chra à similitudine nuncupata, eo quod manu [...] ex lapide aliaue ma­teria corum vultus imitantur, in quo­rum honorem fin­guntur. Cabrera. in 3. q. 25. ar. 3. disp. 3. §. n. 63. Dicitur I­mago ab imitando, quià imitatur & re­presentar interiora exemplaris, expri­mens, illud secuti est., to wit, to the pictures of persons, & visible creatures which were taken from the immediate beholding of the Proto­type, but not to such Images as are made by coniecture Arnob. c. Gent. li. 6. Vndè [...] an [...] haec, quae Dijs im mortalibus vicaria substitutio­ne formatis, simili­tudiné habeāt, &c. potest enim fieri, vt barbatus in Coelo sit, qui hic à vobis effingitur len is. Lact. d. ver. Relig. li. 2., or vpon fabulous and Apocriphall reports, such as are the Images of Christ, and of the Prophets, Apostles, and many other Saints, drawne and pourtrayed many ages since their depar­ture B out of the world. Papists (besides many other formes) de­paint the blessed Virgin, like the Queene of Heauen, with a crowne of Starres, and clothed with the Sunne, and treading the Moone vnder her feet. This and the like Images are false represents, neither haue they direct and immediate correspon­dence to the parts and qualities of the persons represented. And whereas the Iesuit tearmeth an Image (meaning such as is vsed in his Church) A distinct and liuely pourtraiture, &c. he should rather haue said, A confused and dead pourtraiture Arnob. Adu. Gent. li. 6. Ludus est simulachra ista confingere, normina illis tanquam propria dedicare quibus, si habitum detrahas tollatur cognitio [...]. Lactant. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 18. Quicquid similatur id [...] sit necesse est, nec potest [...] verinomen accipere, quod veritatem suco & imitatione mentitur.: for who is able to deliuer a distinct and liuely Picture, truely resembling Christs humane bodie, or the countenance, fea­ture, C and proportion of many other Saints deceased? And Cle­mens Alexandrinus Clem. Alexandr. [...]. pag. 25. Agobard. d. Pict. & Imag. Homo facere non potest quicquam in quo sit similitudo hominis in men­te & ratione. Nàm si exprimit vtcunquè sculpendo vel pingendo aliquam similitudinem corporis aut membro­ram, hoc vtiquè exprimit quod minimum est in homine non quod maximum. Epiphan. tom. 2. li. 3. Haer. 59. siuè 79. [...], &c. speaking of a painted Image, doth not call it liuely, but saith that it is [...], a dead matter formed by a workemans hand: [...]. But we (saith he) vse no Image made of sensible matter, but such onely as is perceiued by vnderstanding.

But if we consider the Pictures and Puppets which now a daies in most places, our Romists make of the blessed Virgin, we may wish that they had made only dead or confused pour­traitures. E And what Christian eyes, if not bleared with the fogge of Superstition, can with patience behold the dresses, at­tires, and various fashions, wherin they [...] present the B. Virgin; yea many times like a Curtesane, or after the lightestand most [Page 213] immodest fashions of the world? What proportion or cor­respondence A is there with the sampler, in these prodigious formes?

IESVIT.

The office of an Jmage is to carrie the imagination of the beholders thereof, directly and immediatly to the person imagined therein; Jmagination of parts in the person re­presented, answering vnto the parts seene in the Image: B which kind and vse of Images nature allowes vnto men, to the end they may remember and more fully imagine per­sons absent and remooued from their corporall fight, vpon whom they ought and haue great desire liuely and staidly to fix their imaginations and thoughts.

ANSWER.

Images of visible persons and creatures, may leade the C imagination of Beholders, to the Person, and Creature re­presented by them. But Images of Christ and of the Trinitie, and of the glorified Saints, are deficient in their expression, and representation, and they may misleade the imagination, and ingender a carnall conceit Agobard. lib. d. Pictur. & Imagin. tom. 9. Biblioth. col. Quantum autem visibilia noceant ad inuisibilia capienda, & quantum amor corporearum terum etiàm bonarum, ad spiritualia contemplanda, ipse Dominus demonstrat dicens: Ego [...] dico vobis, expedit vobis vt ego [...], [...] enim non abiero non mit­tam D [...] ad vos. of those Persons, and also hin­der the spirituall knowledge and Faith, which people ought to haue of them.

The Spirit of God, which knoweth best what helpes are vsefull, and necessarie, to eleuate our mindes to spirituall Contemplation, hath left vs his Gospell, wherein Christ Ie­sus is depainted before the eyes of our soule, Galathians 3. 1. And also the holy Sacraments, which are visible signes, and Seales of Grace: but if painted and carued Images Aug. d. Con­sens. Euang. li. 1. ca. 10. Sic omnino er­rare meruerūt, qui Christum & Apo­stolos eius, non in sanctis Codicibus, sed in pictis [...] quaesierunt. Clem. Alex. [...] lib. 5. pag. [...] [...]., had beene such motiues, and effectuall meanes, to infuse godly memorie, and heauenly desires, into our hearts (as [...] E pretend) wee may be assured that our great Paraclete would haue expresly appointed and recommended the same in his Word: so farre would hee haue beene from perpetuall defa­cing of Images, and condemning the ordinarie vse of them in his Worship.

[Page 214] I answere therefore, It may bee the Office or vse of some A Images, to wit, of such as agree with the Prototype, and which are permitted by the Word of God, and are lawfully made and vsed, to leade the imagination of the beholders, to the remembrance of the person, and thing imagined. But if peo­ple presume beyond their modell, and aduenture to delineate that in Pictures and Images, which they know not, and in­uent a kinde of Teaching, which was not learned in the Schoole of Christ Chrys. ad pop. Ancioch. Hom. 60. Discamus Christū, prout ipse vult ve­nerari. Honorato namque iueundissimus honor, quem ipse vult, non quem nos putamus. Nam & [...] se honorare pu­tabat, cum sibi pedes eumlauare prohiberet, sed non erat honor quem agebat sed contrarium. August. d. consens. Euang. lib. 1. cap. 18. Si alio modo eum colere vellent, quam se colendum ipse dixisset; non vtique illum colerent, sed quod ipsi finxissent.; their owne inuentions, prooue snares, and their Images beget vaine imaginations, to say no worse of them. B

IESVIT.

Hence ariseth the allowed Principle of Nature, recei­ued by all Nations, ciuill and barbarous, Ita vt in eo, to speake with Saint Augustine, Nulla Doctorum pau­citas, C [...] contra Manich. nulla indoctorum turba dissentiat: That the I­mage, may, and ought to stand for the Prototype, and is by imagination to be taken, as if it were the verie person, and what wee outwardly doe to the Image, is done by imagination vnto the person. As when wee kisse the hands and feete of the Jmage, in our imagination, wee kisse the hands and feet of the Person inwardly imagined D by his Image.

ANSWER.

It is no Axiome of Nature, that euerie Artificiall Image deuised by man, may, and ought to stand for the Proto­type, and is by imagination to bee taken as if it were the very Person, and what wee outwardly doe to the Image, is done by imagination, to the Person, but onely of such Images [...]. Hal. 3. q. 3. m. 3. ar. 3. Signum per nstitutionem. as are lawfully appointed, either by Ciuile or Diuine Ordi­nance E to these ends.

The brasen Serpent, was a Figure, and Image of Christ, and yet it did not in such sort stand for the Prototype, as that outward Adoration and burning of Incense might lawfully [Page 215] be done vnto it [...]. in 3. p. Thom. q. 25. [...]. 104. cap. 5. Iussit Deus, [...] & stantes, absque vlla [...] nota & [...], in ipsum aspicere, vt tota [...] & [...], in Deum Aucto­rem illius [...], nullam vero corporalem Adorationem aut submissionis notam in eum dirigerent. Quare quando Ezechias ipsum confregit, B quod videret ei incensum adoleri, cum tamen in solam memoriam praeteriti beneficij a Deo accepti, in populo illo seruaretur, non ideo fecit, quia existimaret à populo pro Deo iam coli & adorari, sed quod aliquem cultum, qualem etiam imaginibus deferre nos consueuimus, qui omnino erat populo illi prohibitus, videret ei adhiberi. Adolebant enim illi incensum, nec aliam causam, ob quam Ezechias ipsum confregit Scriptura nobis exposuit: at incensi oblatio non est [...] sacrificium soli Deo debitum, sed quae etiam rebus inanimis, aut imaginibus [...].. In like sort, the Paschall Lambe was a A figure of Christ, Ioh. 1. 29. & cap. 19. 36. and yet no holy [...] kissed, or saluted, or censed, or bowed downe to the Pas­chall Lambe. The Cherubins (according to our Aduersaries Tenet) were Images, and yet they were neuer honoured or adored with kissing, kneeling, Incense, or any other signe, in speciall directed to them. And if any man (saith Vas­ques Vasques, d. Ador. lib. 2. Disp. 4. cap. 6. n. 101. Nunquam Cherubinis, aut ex [...] fusili, aut ex [...], a summo [...] ingrediente semel in anno [...], honorem aut [...] ad­hibitam fuisse, aut osculo, aut genuflexione, aut oblatione thuris, aut alio signo peculiari ad ipsos [...], [...] illius [...] & venerationem, in [...] ipsam & propitiatorium, tanquam in Thronum & suppedaneum [...] Dei fuisse relatam: ita vt signa honoris externa, [...] & [...], animus autem Sacerdo­tis in Deum, qui ibi sedebat, & responsa dabat, non in Angelos ipsos, qui erant exemplaria illarum figurarum, esset [...]. Nec quisquam nisi ex [...] cerebro, & absque vllo [...], contrarium poterit affirmare. Tho-Aquin. 1.2. q. 102. ar. 4. ad. 6. Similitudines Seraphin non ponebantur ad cultum, quod prohibebatur primo Le­gis praecepto, sed in signum ministerij. Tertull. c. Marcion. lib. 2. cap. 22. Sic & Cherubin & Seraphin, aurea in C Arcam, figuratum exemplum, certe simplex ornamentum, accommodata suggestui, &c. Vasq. in 3. p. Thom. [...]. 1. q. 25. [...] 3. Disp. 104. cap. 6. Quo loco non docet Tertullianus, vt falso Pamelius putauit in vetere Lege solum esse prohibitum similitudines & effigies pro Dijs adorari, &c. pag. 996.) hold otherwise, it is a conceit of his owne braine, hauing no foundation.

It is not necessarie therefore (according to the Law of Na­ture) but at the furthest contingent, to exhibite the same out­ward Actions of Honour, Loue, Reuerence, and Obeysance to Figures, and Images, which belong to the Principall.

In ciuile Comportment, it is lawfull, and in some cases, it is a matter of dutie, to be vncouered, and to vse reuerence in D the Kings Chamber of Presence, and before his Chaire of E­state, when his Person is absent: but these and the like Acti­ons, exceed not the bounds of ciuile Obseruance. In the Church (which is Gods house) wee vncouer our heads, and wee kneele, and make Obeysance before the Altar, or Com­munion Table; not to the figure of the Temple, or to the Ta­ble, materially or formally considered, but to Christ himselfe. And when wee worship towards the East (as the antient Chri­stians did Orig. sup. Num. Hom. 5. Tertull. A­pol. c. 16. Iustin. ad Orthod. q. 118. [...]. d. plur. & necess. Quest. q. 14. Greg. Nissen. li. d. Orat. Basil. d. Spirit. sanct. c. 27. August. serm. in Mont. li. 2. c. 19. [...]. Or­thod. fid. li. 4. c. 13.) if there be a Crucifix painted in the Window, for Ornament, or Memorie, wee direct no part of our Obey­sance E to that painted Image, but to our blessed Sauiour, who hath visited vs [...], as the Day, or Easterne Light, from on high, Luc. 1. 78. And it is so farre from beeing vniuersally true, that the Image is to be taken for the Prototype, that in [Page 216] some cases wee may adore the one, and deface and abolish the A other, as appeareth in the Brasen Serpent. If ( saith Alphonsus Castro Alphons. Ca­stro. c. Haer. lib. 8. verb. Imago. Si er­go populus Chri­stianus, esset nunc aeque pronus ad [...], vt tunc fuit populus Israel, nec aliter posset ab errore reuocari, quam imaginibus confractis, crede­rem eas merito debere [...]. [...], in 3. q. 27. ar. 8. Quamuis imaginum vsus [...] bonus, & Ecclesiae vulis, si tamen inde Idololatria ita oriri cognosceretur, vt ei communi pesti aliter occurri non possit, nisi imaginibus deletis, essent procul dubio illae iudicio & praecepto Maiorum delendae. Cordub. Questionar. q. 5. dub. 5. p. 84.) Christian people were in our dayes as prone to Idolatrie, as the people of Israel then were, and that they could not otherwise be reclaimed, I should thinke, that Images were to be broken in peeces. The same is affirmed by Corduba and Tapia.

IESVIT. B

This is the Axiome of Philosophie, gathered out of Aristotle, Idem est motus in imaginem & exemplar: Aristotl. lib. d. Me­mor. D. Thom. 3. q. 25. Ar. 4. For Motion proceeding from the bodie and from the mind, what the bodie doth really and externally to the Image, the mind doth imaginarily, that is, by conceit and affe­ction to the person. C

ANSVVER.

Principles of Nature, containing themselues within their owne bounds, are to be embraced; but sacred and religious Actions are regulated by a Diuine and supernaturall Modell Ambros. d. In­carn. & Sacrament. c. 9. Verba Philoso­phorum excludit simplex veritas piscatorum. August. d. verb. Apost. ser. 29. Non [...] in hac re & in hac con­trouersia ad literas seculares, nec inter nos iudicet poeta, sed Propheta. Tertull. d. Resur. Carnis. Est quidem de communibus sensibus sapere in Dei rebus, sed in testimonium veri, non in adiutorium falsi. D, 1. Cor. 2. 5, 6, 9. &c.

The Word of God hath set a blacke marke vpon Images deuised by man, when they are applyed to worship. And therefore, although in humane and ciuill vse, the Image might in some sort stand for the Prototype, and by imagination be taken, and vsed, as the person resembled by it, yet in things religious, and sacred, it is otherwise.

When the Israelites formed and worshipped a Golden Calfe, they might by conceit and imagination apprehend and E worship the true God; but this imagination and apprehension was not sufficient to iustifie their Action. Men may in their owne wisedome and intention conceiue and worship Images, and other Signes, as if they were one and the same thing with [Page 217] that which is the proper obiect of Worship; but when they A conioyne that which God hath diuided, their foolish and er­roneous fancie and imagination maketh not their Actions law­full, or pleasing to God.

Aristotle in the place obiected (d. Memor. cap. 1. in fine) affirmeth not, either verbally, or in sense, that there is the same motion of the Conceit, and Affection, Medin. Tr. d. Orat. q. 2. Gabr. 3. d. 9. & in Can. Miss. Lect. 50. Cor­dub. Quaest. 5. dub. 1. pag. [...]. Adora­tio formaliter non est actus intelle­ctus, &c. Peres. Aiala. d. Trad. p. 3. d. Imag. Aristote­les solum dicit, du­plicem esse cognitionem imaginis, aliud tamen vbi dixerit non vidi. Et quamuis res ita se haberet, quod eadem cognitione feramur in imaginem, & rem imaginatam, non inde concluditur, idem fieri posse in adoratione & veneratione: Est enim maxima dissimilitudo inter hoc & illud. into the externall Image, and the Sampler: for hee speaketh not of painted or carued Images, but of the mentall Image and impression which remayneth in the memorie, after the knowledge of things past: And many Schoolemen denie, that Aristotles testimonie, is B truly applyed to Aquinas his manner of worshipping Ima­ges; among which, are Durand Durand. 3. d. 9. q. 2. n. 9., Picus Mirandula Pic. Mirand. Apolog. q. 3., [...] Tapia, in 3. q. 27. ar. 10. Procul dubio, Scholastici qui eam propositionem modo exposito explicauerunt, non consuluerunt textum Aristotelis., Vasques Vasq. d. Ador. lib. 2. Disp. 8. cap. 7. n. 317. Illa sententia, quam S. Tho. ex Aristotele desumpsit: Idem est motus in imaginem, & rem cuius est Imago, alium quidem sensum habet, &c. Quocirca perperam quidam recentiores putant, eodem modo se ha­bere C in adoratione, imaginem depictam, sicut se verbum habet interius., &c.

It is also apparantly false, that there is the same motion of the mind and will into the Image, and the Sampler, for these are euerie way two distinct Obiects, and the one is a signe, and the other a thing signified; the one is the cause, the other the thing caused; and in some Images, the Sampler is a na­ture increate, the Image considered as an Image, and in re­lation to the Prototype, is a thing created: the one is ado­red, because of it selfe, the other respectiuely, because of D the Sampler. And therefore, for as much as the Obiect is diuers, and the manner of the Action is diuers, the motion of mans heart towards the Image, and the Sampler, cannot be one motion, but diuers; euen as when I desire the meanes, because of the end, here are two distinct Actions Tapia, in 3. Thom. q. 27. [...]. 10. Non est idem actus voluntatis, quo ferimur in finem, & in media ad finem. Vnus enim est electio, alter simplex voluntatis affectus. Greg. Arim. 1. d. 1. q. 2. Marsil. 1. q. 4. ar. 1. du. 2. Vasq. 1. 2. q. 8. Disp. 33. cap. 2. August. d. Trinit. E Lib. 11. cap. 6., and mo­tions, to wit, Election and Intention.

IESVIT. A

This Axiome of Philosophie (that no man thinke it dis­auowed in Theologie) the antient Fathers vniformely teach, as a prime truth, euident in reason; S. Damascen Lib. 4. c. 12., S. Augustine De Doctr. Christ. lib. 3. c. 9., S. Ambrose Lib. de Dom. Incat. Sacram. c. 7., S. Basil De Spiritu Sancto; c. 18., S. Atha­nasius Serm. 4. contra Atianas., who writes, An Image of the King is nothing else but the forme and shape of the King; which (could it speake) would and might say, J and the King are B one, the King is in me, and I in him: so that who a­doreth me, his Image, doth therein adore the verie King: Thus he shewing, that the Kings Image is to be imagined, and by imagination, conceiued and honou­red as the verie King.

ANSWER. C

You affirme, That the antient Fathers vniformely teach, and that as a prime truth, That the Image may and ought to stand for the Prototype, and is by imagination to be taken as if it were the very Person; and consequently, that it is ioyntly to be worshipped. First, you say, the antient Fathers teach this Doctrine vniformely: secondly, you adde, That they teach this as a prime Truth. But to prooue the first, you produce onely fiue Testimonies of Fathers, of which, one is not very antient; and touching the latter, you bring nothing.

The Testimonies of the Fathers examined. D

First, Damascene, d. Fid. lib. 4. cap. 12. saith, [...], where his signe is, there is Christ, to wit, by ope­ration and grace. First, this Author liued 740 yeeres after Christ, and is none of the antient Fathers: Secondly, it is confessed by your selues, that hee was not Orthodoxall in all points: For (as Cardinall Bellarmine saith Bell. d. Script. Eccles. in Ioh. Da­masc. pag. 269. lib. 1. d. Fid. Orthod. cap. 11. Docet Spi­ritum sanctum non procedere ex Filio, sed per Filium. Palacius, [...]. Quaest. in 1. Lib. Sent. B. Damascenus manifesta­rium habuit lapsum, &c. pag. 21.) hee denyed the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne; and in the mat­ter of Images, hee differeth from the antient, which were E before him.

[Page 219] Secondly, Saint Augustine Aug. sub signo seruit, qui operatur aut veneratur ali­quam rem fignifi­cantem, nesciens quid fignificet. Qui vero aut operatur, aut veneratur vtile fignum diuinitus institutum, culus vim significatio­nemque intelligit, non hoc veneratur quod videtur & transit, sed illud potius, quo talia cuncta reserenda sunt. d. Doctr. Christ. l. 3. c. 9. saith, A Hee which vseth or worshippeth any profitable signe, being of di­uine Institution, vnderstanding the vertue and signification thereof, worshippeth not that which is visible and transeunt, but that ra­ther, whereunto all such things are referred. But Popish Ima­ges, appointed for Worship, are no Sacraments, or Cere­monies, or Signes of Diuine Institution, but humane Tradi­tions, condemned by Saint Augustine Aug. d. Haeres — haeres. 7. Id. Epist. 49. & sup. Psal. 113. B, both among Christians and Pagans.

Thirdly, Saint Ambros. Ambros. Nun­quid cum & [...] eius ado­ramus, & carnem, Christum diuidi­mus? Nunquid cum in eo imaginem, crucem (que) venera­mur, diuidimus [...] d. Dom. Incarn. Sacram. c. 7. saith, When we adore his Diuinitie and his flesh, doe we diuide Christ? When wee worship in him the Image of God, and the Crosse, doe wee diuide him? This Father speaketh not of any Painted Image of God, but of the inuisible Image Caietan. sup. Col. 1. Deitatem inuisibilem accepit filius à Patre., Col. 1.15. Heb. 1.3. And by the Crosse, he vnderstandeth the Passion of Christ Bellarm. d. imag. c. 24. Dico Ambrosum, per cru­cem intelligere passionem Christi, siue carnem patientem, sicut per imaginem Dei, intelligit dietatem. C, as appeareth in his next words, Etsi crucifixus est, &c.

Saint Basil and Saint Athanasius, spake by way of similitude, not of all Images, but of the Images of Kings Basil. d. spir. sanct. c. 18. [...]. Athanas. c. Arian. Orat. 4. pag. 254. [...]., which some­times, not alwayes, in Ciuile vse and custome, not in Reli­gion, may be taken, and reuerenced for the principall. But from a particular, and from a similitude, which halteth in many things Ib. pag. 256. Non aliter quam si quis, per diurnum tem­pus, D sole iam lucente, lignum temere depingat, in quo ne imaginaria quidem species lucis appareat, asseratque hoc lignum authorem esse diurni luminis, Sol contra id videns occlamet ego solus sum diurna lux, neque est alia lux preter me, non respectu sui iubaris illud dixerit, sed ob Ligneae imaginis imposturam & [...] vanissimae apparentiae., you cannot conclude generally and abso­lutely.

Where is now the vniforme consent of Fathers, which the Aduersarie glorieth in? Damascene is not antient. Saint Au­gustine speaketh of signes which haue diuine institution. Saint Ambrose, of Christ his Passion, and not of Statues or Pictures. Saint Basil and Athanasius, speake by similitude, obiter, and by the way. But which of these affirmes, that Image Worship is E a prime veritie?

But that the Reader may the better conceiue the weight of the Aduersaries Disputation, for Worship of Images, I will exhibit the same in a Logicall Resolution.

[Page 220] The Theme or Question is, Whether artificiall Images of Christ, A and of the Saints are to be worshipped.

The first ground and Argument for the Affirmatiue, is: If the Samplers themselues are to be worshipped, then the Images be­ing [...] 3. q. 25. [...]. 3. Disp. 3. [...]. 4. liuely Portraitures, and representations of those Samplers, are to be worshipped.

The Consequence is denied, for besides that all Images, and among the rest, the Images of Christ, are not liuely Por­traitures of Christ, but dead shaddowes, and imperfect and confuled delineations of his humanitie Euseb. Caesar. Epist. ad Constan­tiam. August. Quo­niam de Christi I­magine ad me scripsisti, vt tibi mit­terem; velim mihi significes, quam­nam putes Christi Imaginem, vtrumillam veram & incommutabilem, naturae illius Characterem ferentem, aut hanc quam prop­ter nos assumpsit, seruilem sormam pro nobis induens, sed sanè de diuina forma, non arbitror etiam ipse ego, te essesollicitam, cum fueris ab illo edocta, neminem patrem cognouisse, nisi qui illum genuit patrem, sed [...] serui requiris, Imaginem [...], & carnem quam propter nos induit. Sed & hanc gloria Dietatis suae commistam esse didicimus, & passam mortuamque. Quis igitur gloriae eiuscemodi, & dignitatis splendores lucentes & ful­gurantes effigiare mortuis & inanimatis coloribus, & vmbratili pictura possit, cum neque diuini illius discipuli in monte illum contemplari quiuerint, qui cadentes in faciem suam non posse se eiuscemodi spectaculum inspicere confessi sunt. Igitur si carnis illius figura tantam ab inhabitante in ea diuinitate accepit potentiam, quid oportet C dicere tunc cum mortalitatem eruit & corruptionem abluens formam serui in Domini & Dei gloriam transtulit? post mortis scilicet victoriam, post ascensum in caelos, post cum patre regio in throno à dexteris consessum, post requiem in ineffabilibus, & innominandis finibus patris, in quam ascendentem & desidentem coelestes potestates illi bonedictis vocibus acclamabant, dicentes Principes tollite portas vestras, aperiamini portae caelestes: in troi­bit Rex gloriae.: yet whatsoeuer they are artificially, and by humane constitution, they are not to be B worshipped Religiously, because no diuine Institution or Au­thoritie permitteth man so to doe: and on the contrary part, di­uine Precept extant in the Morall Law, prohibiteth the doing heereof.

OBIECTION II.

If the Image represent the Sampler, and stand for it, and by conceit and imagination is one with it, then it may, and ought to bee worshipped, &c.

But the first is true, &c. D

If the Argument be thus resolued, the sequel is false; for that which representeth another, and standeth for another, and is by imagination another, partaketh not all the Rites and du­ties of that which it representeth: but such onely, as by law­full ordination, and by the nature of his kinde, it is capable of: but Painted and Carued Images, neither by the nature of their kinde Cluniaces. d. ven. Crucis pa. 54. Irrationali hono­rem vel modicum exhibere, & autho­ritas prohibet, & ratio disuadet., being things sencelesse, liuelesse, and desti­tute of Grace, nor yet by any diuine Ordination, are capable of Adoration. The brasen Serpent was a figure and Image of E Christ crucified, it did represent the Sampler, and stand for it, and by conceit and imagination of the faithfull beholder, it was one with Christ, to wit, by Relation as a signe with the thing signified: yet it being not appointed by God to bee worship­ped, [Page 221] nor being capable of worship, according to the nature A and qualitie of his kind, the Israelites committed Idolatrie, in worshipping and burning Incense to it.

OBIECTION III.

There is the same motion of the minde, into the Image and the Sampler, as we may perceiue by the Image of the King.

There is not the same motion, &c. but a diuerse: for the mind is fixed vpon the Image, as vpon a Signe, and as vpon B an Obiect inferiour to the Sampler: and if there bee the same Motion in any person towards the Image and the Sampler, the same proceedeth vpon error, and is a false imagination, nei­ther doth the Image of a King Hieron. sup. Da­niel. 3. ludices & Principes seculi, qui Imperatorum statuas adorant, hoc se facere intel­ligant, quod hic pueri facere nolen­tes, placuerunt Deo. stand for a very King, but for asigne and representation. And if there were the same mo­tion of the mind, into the Image and the Samplar, yet it is in­consequent to say, there must be the same Adoration (as Pere­sius Aiala Peres. d. Trad. p. 3. d. imag. Quamuis res se ita haberet, quod eadem cognitione fe­ramur C in Imaginem & rem imaginatam, non inde concluditur, idem fieri posse in Adoratione & veneratione: est enim maxima dissimilitudo inter hoc & illud. hath obserued.)

IESVIT.

With this Principle so receiued in Nature, wee must ioyne another, no lesse knowne and notorious in Christiani­tie, to wit, That God full of all honour and glorie, to whom all Worship and Adoration is due, became truely D and verily man, as visible and aspectable as any other man, and consequently, as imaginable, that hee may bee figured by an Image, no lesse truely and distinctly than an­other man.

ANSVVER.

When Christ liued vpon the earth, and was conuersant with men, Iohn 1. 14. hee might then perhaps (if Diuine pro­uidence E had permitted) haue beene figured, according to some­thing which was visible in his humane Bodie: I say, if Diuine Prouidence had permitted, because for preuention of Idolatrie and Superstition, it fell out in this case, as it did with the bodie [Page 222] of Moses [...]. sup. 1. Timoth. c. 2. disp. [...]. Erat olim pericu­lum Idolola triae: Vndè etiàm subla­tus fuit Imaginum vsus, & corpus Mo­sis ob [...] cau­sam occultatū fuit. pa. 473. Aug. d. Mirab. sacr. Script. lib. 1. c. 35. Duabus de causis vt [...], [...] & [...] conscius erat, quatenùs illam faciem, quae consortio sermonis Domini rutilauerat, mortis [...], nul­lus videret. Et nè sepulchrum eius, populus Israel si cognouisset vbi esset adoraret. Procopius in [...]. cap. [...]. Di­uina dispositione hoc quoquè factum, ne forte eum suspicientes adorarent.. And because this was not then performed, either A by his owne, or by his Apostles appointment, we can haue no certainetie, that the after painting and figuring of him, is a con­uenient meanes whereby to honour him, and to cause deuoti­on, or that Pictures and Images whereby he hath beene figured in latter ages, are agreeable to the sampler.

IESVIT. B

In which Image, the hands, feet, and other parts shall truely by imagination correspond vnto the feet, bands, and parts of the Prototype, and our imaginations from [...] passe directly vnto Christ and his parts, proportionable to those we behold in the Image; so that when we adore with an humble outward kisse, the hands and feet of the Image, by inward imagination, conceipt, and affection, we kisse and C adore the imagined true hands and feet of Christ. Neither are these imaginations false and erronious, seeing (as Phi­losophie teacheth) no falshood is in meere apprehension or imagination, without iudging the thing to be as we ima­gine. As in contemplation, men represent and imagine them­selues as standing before Gods Throne, in the Court of Heauen, amidst the quires of Saints and Angels, praising and honouring him in their societie, not iudging themselues to be truely and really in Heauen, (that were a falshood D and dotage) but only [...] in themselues such a pre­sence, and [...] themselues outwardly and inwardly in Psalm. 41. Bernard Serm. de quatuor modis orandi. prayer, as if they were present: to which kind of imagi­nations, as pious and godly, the Scriptures and Fathers exhort vs. In this sort, beholding the Image of Christ, we apprehend him as therein present; not iudging the Image to be Christ, but imagining and taking it as it were Christ, that when wee outwardly honour the Jmage by kissing the E hands and feet thereof, mentally by imagination and humble affection of reuerence, we adore and kisse the most vene­rable hands and feet of his pretious bodie.

ANSVVER. A

It is possible for imagination to build castles in the aire, and to conceiue the person of Christ, as present to his Image: yet if this imagination be fantasticall, and if in adoration, Christ and Images haue no agreement, 2. Cor. 6.16. then worshipping of Images, is not worshipping of Christ; for it is possible to imagine God to be in the Sunne, and to behold the Sunne as Gods Image Aug. sup. Psal, 103. c. 3., yet they which vpon such an imagination, should worship the Sunne, which God hath not commanded, B must be ranked amongst false worshippers, Deut. 4.19. & 17.3. Iob. 31.26.

And whereas the Obiector addeth, that according to Phi­losophie, no falshood is in meere apprehension or imaginati­on Aug. d. Ver. Relig. c. 55. Non sit nobis [...], in [...]' no­stris, &c. [...]. E­pist. 85. [...] carnalis com­positionem, [...] fermentú, vbi [...] incipit, conti­nuò intus illo ad­iuuante atquè il­luminante, qui cùm talibus Idolis in corde nostro habitare nòn vult, ità ista confringere & à fide nostra excutere festinemus, & nè [...] quidem [...] talium phantasmatum illic remanere patiamur., without iudging the thing to be, as we imagine. I an­swer, That this being granted concerning fictions Aug. Quest. sup. Euang. li. 2. c. 51. Nòn omne quod fingimus mendatium est, &c. Fictio quae ad aliquam veritatem refertur figura est, &c. Aquin. p. 3. q. 55. ar. 4. ad. 1., yet vpon such imagination, there may follow, or be inferred that which is false, or morally euill: to wit, if one imagine the Sunne, or a Lambe to be the figure of Christ, and, because in holy Scrip­tures he is compared to these creatures, Mal. 4.2. Iohn 1.29. C conceiue them as his image, shall it hereupon be lawfull by one and the same motion of the cogitation and affection, to worship the creatures with their Creator?

But that the solution of the former Argument may be more perspicuous, I will present the same in forme, and then applie mine answer. D

If by imagination we may truely conioine Christ himselfe Henriquez. Sum. Theol. Mor. li. 8. ca. 32. Quarè ex patri­bus sumpsit Caie­tanus, dicens Ima­go Christi, est ipse Christus, tùm quo­ad rationē forma­lem terminandi, tú quià Christus simul est vltimus termi­nus. E Non est Chri­stus in esse reali, sed intentionali, vt verbum dicitur terminus, & dicitur ipsa res cognita in esse intensionali, & [...] ordinis cum re: sic Imago Christi est eiusdem ordinis diuini, vt si [...] species Dei in beatis. with his Image, then vpon that imagination, we may coworship Christ, and his Image:

But the first may be done, for he being incarnate, may be fi­gured in the Image of a man, and being thus figured, may be pre­sented to the vnderstanding, and people may imagine him as pre­sent, in, or by his Image. Ergo,

Vpon that imagination, we may worship Christ and his Image.

Both the assumpsition, and also the sequel of this Argument, are denied.

[Page 224] First, taking truely, for that which is really true, we cannot by A imagination so conioine Christ and his painted Image, as that we may conceiue them to bee one terminatiue obiect, of worship, for the reasons formerly deliuered. Neither is the Picture or Image of any other person the terminatiue ob­iect of Loue, Reuerence, or Worship, but onely a motiue, and signe of remembrance, vpon aspect whereof, followeth the former actions (inward or outward) of Loue, Reuerence, or Worship, not towards the Image, but towards the principall.

Secondly, it is inconsequent to argue, that because some people imagine the Image and the sampler as things conioi­ned, B therefore they may coworship them; for religious adora­tion primarie or secondarie, is not founded vpon euerie kind of vnion, as appeareth in mental Images Apud Ca­brer. Internae Ima­gines multo [...] representāt ipsum exemplar, quā Imagines ex­ternae, [...] istae solum representant corporis lineamen­ta, conceptus vero naturam specificā ipsius rei viuentis., but vpon certain kinds of vnion, to wit: First, Personal, as when the Humanitie of Christ is coupled with the Dietie: Secondly, Substantiall, as where the parts are coupled with the whole: Thirdly, Causall, Relatiue, or Accidentall, to wit, when by diuine ordination, things created are made instruments, messengers, signes, or receptacles of di­uine grace, as the holy Sacraments, and the Word and Gos­pell, and the Ministers of the Church, &c. Christ himselfe is C present, assistant, and operatiue, in and by these instruments, and hath commanded reuerence to be vsed towards them, accoun­ting the loue, faith, and honour which are yeelded to his created Word, to be loue, faith, and honour to himselfe Ambros. Ep. 26. Domino defer­tur cum seruul' ho­noratur, &c. Greg. sup. Reg. lib. 5. ca. 1. Quam reuerendi sunt optimi Pasto­res sanctae Eccle­siae liquet. Dum e­nim Deo fidelitèr seruiunt tantò ci amoris vinculo coniunguntur vt quicquid ois ingeritur, diuinae iniuriae ascribatur., Math. 10.14.42. 2. Cor. 8.5. Gal. 4.14. Act. 10.34. But Papisticall fancie and imagination, produceth none of these, nor yet any other true kind of vnion, neither hath God almightie in his word commanded duety, seruice, or worship to be giuen vnto them; but on the contrarie, by the Doctrine of holy Scrip­ture, he condemneth the same. D

IESVIT.

The Histories of Christian Antiquitie, are full of ho­ly men, Bishops, Kings, Queenes, and other honourable personages, who haue cast themselues downe on the ground before Beggers, Lazars, and Leapers, kissing their feet, and D. Harpsfield Hist. Eccles. Angl. their sores, out of venerable affection vnto Christ. In E which kind, memorable is the Charitie of the famous Queene Mathildes, daughter of Malcolme King of Scot­land, and wife to Henrie the first of England, whose cu­stome [Page 225] was to wash with her owne hands the feet of poore A people, amongst whom some were Leapers, and had loath­some diseases, not disdaining with great reuerence on her knees to kisse their feet with her princely lips. And when as the prince of Scotland her brother being then in the Court of England, entring into her chamber, found her imploied in so humble a seruice, astonished thereat, rebu­ked her, saying, Sister what do you? can you with those your defiled lips kisse the king your husband? She answe­red, B Know brother, that the feet of the king of Heauen are more louely and venerable than are the lips of an earthly king. Certainely this queene with all other addi­cted to the like deuotion, when they kissed the feet of the poore outwardly with their lips, did by imagination full of reuerent affection, kisse the feet of Christ Iesus, taking the poore as Images of him, who said, What you do to one of Math. 25. v. 40. my least ones, you do vnto me. C

ANSWER.

There is great disparitie betweene reasonable creatures, the liuing members of Christ, the spirituall temples of the holy Ghost, and betweene dead and sencelesse stockes [...]. Rom. Recog. lib. 5. Si ve­re vultis honorare Imaginem Dei, nos vobis quid yerum est aperimus, vt homini qui ad Ima­ginem Dei factus est, benè saciatis, honorem & reue­rentiam deferatis. Quis ergo iste Dei honor est, per la­pideas & ligneas formas [...] & inanes atquè ex­animes figuras, tā ­quam numina ve­nerari, & hominem in quo vere Imago Dei est spernere., which haue eyes and see not, eares and heare not, noses and smell not. Beg­gers, Lazars, Leapers, &c. are recommended to the world by our Sauiour, Ioh. 12.8. Luc. 14.21. and they are said to honour their Maker, which are charitable to them, Pro. 14.31. and he promiseth infinit reward to them which loue and honour the D poore. Where (I pray you) hath our Sauiour said of Images of stone, wood, &c. nay of puppets, and pranked babies, What you do to one of these my least ones, you do vnto me? Sure­ly the cloathing, censing, bowing, pilgrimage going to Ima­ges deuised by mans braine, hath neither precept, promise, ex­ample, or praise in all Gods Booke, neither is there any digni­tie or excellencie in them, formally, or accidentally, which may equall them to the meanest reasonable creature. An Idol Bellarm. d. Imag. li. 2. c. 8. [...] pro eodem habet Idolum & Imaginem. Tertul. d. Idol. c. 4. Durand. Rational li. 1. c. 3. Vbi [...] Idolorum [...] vsus reprobatur, moderatus probatur. Caietan. in Exod. c. 20. Perspicuum est in Tabernaculo fuisse Idola cherubinorum, &c. Id. in Deut. c. 4. Ex co quod nulla Dei similitudo visa est, quandò Deus locutus est, mouet vt nullum Idolum colatur, nulla similitudo cuiusquè rei naturalis, nec vlla res corporea. (saith S. Augustine Aug. d. ver. Dom. Serm. 5. Idolum opus est fabri, si faber Idolo sicut dedit figuram, cor daret, ab ipso Idolo fa­ber E adoraretur. Jdem. sup. Psalm. 149. Melior est faber quam quod fabricat faber. Si fabrum adorare [...], ado­rando quod faber fecit non erubescis? Idem d. ver Relig. c. 55. & in Psal. 118.) is the workemanship of an artificer, and if [Page 226] this maker, as he hath bestowed figure, so he could haue giuen A vnderstanding to his creature, hee should himselfe receiue ho­nour from the Image which he hath formed. And in another place, the Artificer is better than that which himselfe formeth: Why art thou then ashamed to worship the Carpenter, and doest not rather blush when thou adorest that which hee hath formed? [...], (saith Athanasius [...]. Orat. c. gent. [...].) That which formeth another, is better than the thing which is formed.

IESVIT. B

Out of this, the common Obiection of Protestants, to wit, That the worship of Christs Image is no where commanded in Scripture, and therefore is a will Worship; may bee an­swered. For as themselues confesse, many Actions belonging D. Field, lib. 4. of the Church, cap. 17. to Religion, whereof there is no expresse Precept, nor any practise in Scripture, may be vsed, when there be Principles in Scripture, which prooue the lawfulnesse and necessitie thereof. There is no expresse Precept in Scripture to Chri­sten C Jnfants; nor is it there read, that euer any were Chri­stened: yet because there be Testimonies, which ioyned with reason, prooue the lawfulnesse and necessitie of this Bap­tisme, we may and must vse it. In Scripture, there is no expresse Practise nor Precept of worshipping the Image of Christ, yet there be Principles, which (the light of Nature supposed) conuince such Adoration to be lawfull. D

ANSVVER.

Protestants obiect against Adoration of Images, not onely that the same is no where commanded in Scripture, but that it is prohibited, and condemned, Leuit. 26.1. Neither by Com­mandement, vnderstand we expresse and literall Precept onely, but deriuatiue and vertuall. And could Papists demonstrate the lawfulnesse of this Action, by diuine or supernaturall testimo­nie, immediate or deriuatiue, in such manner as the Baptisme of Infants Bellar. d. Bapt. l. 1. c. 9. Colligitur sa­tis apertè ex Scrip­turis. Ib. ad. 8. Arg. Deducitur euiden­ter ex Scripturis. is prooued to be lawfull and necessarie, wee must E approoue the practise thereof.

IESVIT. A

For Christ being true God full of honour, to whom all su­preame adoration is due, doth and must needs make honou­rable and adorable anything that represents him, that is which must be taken by imagination as if it were his [...]. But supposing God to be truely man (as Faith teacheth) the light of nature sheweth that his image truely represents him, that is, makes him present to the imaginations of the B beholders thereof, and stands for him. Ergo, Christ Iesus his image is for his sake venerable and adorable as a thing standing for him in such sort, that the honour done out­wardly to it, is done, and ought to be taken as done, by de­uout and pious imagination to his person, whence further is concluded the necessity of this worship.

ANSWER. C

The Maior Proposition is denyed. For although Christ be true God full of honour, yet he imparteth not his honour in whole or in part to euery thing, which man appointeth to be a representation of him, but onely to such things as haue some excellency in them, proceeding from his owne ordinance, and influence into them. Neither is it in the power of men [...] their owne Imaginations, either to forme representations of Christ, capable of honour; or when they haue formed them, to appoint that they must be honoured and adored Tertul. d. Idol c. 5. Ne facias ad­uersus legem simu­lacrhum aliquod nisi & tibi Deus iusserit. Si nulla lex Dei prohibuis­set Idola fieri à no­bis, nulla vox spi­ritus sancti fabri­catoribus Idolo­rum, non minùs quam cultoribus, comminaretur.. For if the Subiects of secular Princes, cannot without speciall commissi­on, D aduance euen worthy persons, to dignities and honourable places in the Common-wealth, much lesse are mortall men able, to deriue the honours which Christ is Lord of, to what they please, and to inuest their owne handy worke with Christs honour.

IESVIT.

For God incarnate being most venerable and full of glory, requires of a Christian, that that which stands for E him and represents him, be honoured and adored for his sake.

ANSWER. A

Not euery thing which stands for him, and represents him, according to the deuices and imaginations of men, no nor eue­ry thing that represents, and stands for him, according to his owne precept, is to be adored with diuine honour, as it is ma­nifest in the brazen Serpent.

IESVIT.

If the honour due to a King be so great, that the B same redounds from his person to things about him; as to his chaire of State (which is honoured with the like bow­ing and kneeling that is vsed to his person, and to his image, vnto which whosoeuer offereth iuiury is punishable, as of­fering iniury to the King himselfe) shall not the honour due to Christ Iesus infinitelie greater, so flow out of his person vnto things that belong and concerne him, as to make his Image, Crosse, and such holy monuments of his passion and C life, venerable for his sake, and to be adored with bowing, kneeling, and other exteriour honour, as would be vsed to his person were he visibly present? (not so, that the wor­ship rest in the image, but be referred by imagination and affection to the person imagined.)

ANSWER.

This similitude halteth: for the Kings chaire of State, and D his image, when they are honoured or dishonoured, are conioy­ned with his Person, by ciuile ordinance and relation: but the artificiall image of Christ and of his Crosse, &c. are not conioy­ned with Christ, by diuine ordination, or by relation grounded vpon Christs word, but by an imaginary act of the superstiti­ous worshipper; also ciuile and religious worship, are of diuers beginnings, and formes, and euery thing that is possible, law­full and commendable, in the one, is not so in the other. E

IESVIT.

But the image of Christ being a true representation of God incarnate, and able to conuey our imaginations direct­ly [Page 229] and truely towards him, [...] very [...] A vnto the parts of his sacred person, hath [...] right in rea­son and nature, which cannot be taken from it, to repre­sent him, and to stand in our imaginations for him. Where­fore the image of Christ hath a right, which without im­pietie cannot be denyed vnto it, to be honoured and out­wardly adored for his sake, by kneelings, bowings, [...] and kissings, referred in mind by deuout thoughts and affections, to his person. B

ANSVVER.

Is the painted image a true representation of Christ incar­nate, because Romists say so? and were it a true representati­on, is it therefore impietie to refuse to worship it? Many Do­ctours, both of the Romane, and of other Churches, haue al­lowed and maintained the Historicall vse of images, which condemned adoration [...]. [...]. Annal. p. 1. Caro­lusrex Francorum misit Synodalem librum ad Britan­niam, sibi a Con­stantinopoli dire­ctum: in quo proh dolor multa incon­uenientia & verae fidel contraria re­periebantur. Maxi­mè quod penè om­nium orientalium Doctotum, non minus quam tre­centorum, vel [...] amplius, episcopo­rum vnanimi as­sertione confirma­matum fuerit, jma­gines adorari de­bere, quod omninó Ecclesia Dei ex­ecratur. Agobard d. pict. & imag Habuerunt antiqui sanctorum imagines vel pictas vel sculptas, sed [...], non ad colendum. Nullus Catholicorum antiquorum vnquam eas colendas vel ado­randas forté existimauit. Durand. Rational. Div. li. 4. c. 39. attendant quid agant, qui sub praetextu, cuius­dam Religionis seu pietatis diuersas adorant imagines, non enim [...] aliquid manu factum adorare. Andr. Masius. Com. Iosh. 22. v. 28. Sacrosancta Ecclesia nobis antè oculos ponit Crucis Christi figuram, &c. non [...] eam adoremus, sed vt dum aspicimus in memoriam redeamus verae [...] & [...] arae, in qua sacerdos sec. ord. Melchizedech, Deique silius seipsum gratissimam patri pro nobis victinam obtulit. E. And if it be outwardly to be adored for Christs sake, why is it not inwardly also to be adored? And if inwardly, then either with the same worship, wherewith C Christ himselfe is adored, or with inferiour; not with the same, for then a creature which is not personally vnited to the Crea­tour, may be honoured as God. If with inferiour, then either with inferiour honour belonging to the person represented, but there is none such, or with the honour of some other person: but this cannot be, because the image of Christ hath reference to no other person but Christ. And if the painted images of Christ, and the woodden Crosse whereupon he was crucified, were to be adored with [...] honour, absolute or respectiue, D much more were the liuely images of Christ, to wit, the blessed Saints, so to be adored, and the blessed Virgin, aboue all other, because she was more neerely conioyned to him than the woodden Crosse.

IESVIT.

And this right is a dignitie which an image of Christ hath aboue other creatures, who though they be referred [Page 230] vnto God as to their Author, yet God may not be honoured A in them in that manner, as Christ is honoured in his image.

ANSVVER.

This Idolist, heapeth conclusion vpon conclusion, but hee groundeth them, either vpon no premises, or vpon such as are sandie. How doth it appeare, that an image of Christ figured by a Roman Painter, hath a dignity aboue other creatures? Are Roman Painters more excellent workemen than God him­selfe? B Hath a dead picture, and worme-eaten statue, greater dignitie, than the liuely images of Christ, to wit the Saints which are vpon earth, and [...] in vertue [...]. d. pict. ad imag. Si opera [...] Dei non sunt adoranda & colenda, nec in honore Dei, [...] magis [...] hominum non sunt adoranda, & colenda, nec in honore [...] quorum similitudines esse dicuntur. pag. 213.? How much more worthy to be beleeued, is the saying of Clement Clem. Rom. Recog. li. 5. p. 73.? If you desire, truely to honour the image of God, let me open the truth to you, Rather yeeld honour and reuerence to man, formed after the image of God, than to empty and breathlesse figures.

IESVIT. C

The reason is, because creatures represent God their Author, so rudely, remotely, darkely, imperfectly, that one­ly spirituall men, and perfect Contemplants, can acknow­ledge God in them: and so, such men onely, and that onely priuately to themselues, may worship God in and by them, which is all that Vasq. (so much accused) doth teach. But as for publique and promiscuous adoring of creatures, he Gab. Vasquez. de Adoratione. li. 3. cap. 2. D condemnes it as vndecent and scandalous, saying expresse­ly, that Indiscriminatim creaturas adorandas propo­nere, esset multis manifesta causa periculi. In which respect Saint Leo reprehends some Christians at Rome, that bowed vnto the Sunne mentally referring that bow­ing, [...] Serm. 7. de [...]. Dom. vnto God the Author thereof; because Panyms seeing that outward action of adoring, might imagine, that Chri­stians adored the sunne in their superstitious manner; the E relation which the sunne hath to God as to his Creator, not being euident vnto sight. But the image of Christ, as I said, is apparantly so representatiue of Christ, that vpon sight thereof, our thoughts flye presently to him, and his picture [Page 231] is no sooner in our eyes, than his person by imagination in A our mind; neither is there any excellency appearing in the picture, worthy to bee adored, or sufficient to stay our thoughts and affections in it. So that no man can with any probabilitie suspect, that any reason besides reuerence to his Maiestie, makes vs bow our bodies to his image.

ANSWER.

Your reason is no reason, but a meere verball asseueration: B for being reduced to forme, it sounds in this manner.

That which is so representatiue of Christ, as that the sight thereof, carrieth our thoughts presently by imagination to Christ, and yet hath nothing in it worthy of adoration, for it selfe, hath a right, and dignity, to be worshipped aboue other creatures which doe so rudely, remotely, darkely, and imperfectly represent God, that none but spirituall men, and perfect contemplants, can acknowledge and worship God in them.

But artificiall images of Christ, &c. are representations of C the first sort; and other creatures, are onely representatiue, in the latter manner. Ergo,

Painted and carued images of Christ, haue a right and dig­nity to be worshipped aboue other creatures.

Both Propositions of this Argument are denyed.

First, The Maior is false: for imaginarie representation one­ly, without speciall Institution, and other grounds, in the thing representing, may bee onely a motiue, and not a terminatiue D obiect of Worship, as hath formerly beene shewed.

Secondly, The Minor hath no pretext or colour of Truth: Agobard. d. pict. & Imag. Si templum Dei sumus & Spiri­tus Dei habitat in nobis, plus est quod fidelis quisque ha­bet in suo animo, &c. Si vlla Imago esset adoranda, vel colenda, Creatoris potius esset quam Creatura, nempe [...] fecit Deus ad Imaginem & si­militudinem suam, homo autem facere non potest [...] in quo sit similitudo [...] in ratione. Nam si exprimit sculpendo [...] pingendo similitudinem [...] corporis aut membrorum, hoc vt que exprimit quod minimum [...] in homine non quod maximum. Lactant. l. 2. c. 2. Simulachrum Dei non illud est quod digitis hominis & lapide figuratur, sed ipse homo, quoniam & sentit & [...], & multas magnasque actiones habet, &c. for some Creatures doe so represent Christ, as that they are his liuely Image, by Communion and Participation of Grace, 2. Pet. 1.4. And they carrie the mindes of Beleeuers, by their actions, to wit, by their Doctrine and Example, into the distinct, and sauing knowledge of Christ; and they stand heere in the world, in the roome and stead of Christ, by his owne Ordina­tion, 2. Cor. 5.20. But Painted and Carued Images, represent onely a Bodie and a thing externall. And without other E meanes, people cannot know Christ, nor vnderstand such [Page 232] things concerning his Person and Office, as are necessarie to A make them wise to saluation. And whereas the Iesuit saith, That other Creatures doe so rudely, remotely, &c. represent God, that none but perfect contemplants, can acknowledge and worship him in them; the holy Scripture speaketh in a contrarie manner, to wit, That the visible things of God, his power and Godhead, &c. were made manifest, and clearely to be seene, in the fabricke of his Creatures Basil. Hexam. Ho. 11. Aug. d. ver. Relig. c. 29. Ambros. Ep. 83. In [...] coeli & ter­rae, quaedam sunt paginae, ad omnium oculos semper patentes, & suum Authorem nunquam tacentes, quarum B protestatio, Magistrorum imitatur Doctrinam, & eloquia Scripturarum. Aug. sup. Psal. 142. Niceph. Eccl. Hist. l. 11. c. 43. Greg. Naz. Orat. 34. Greg. Mag. sup. Iob c. 35. suspice l. 26. c. 8. Aug. d. verb. Dom. ser. 55. & confess. l. 10. c. 6., euen of Heathen people, which were not spirituall men, or perfect Contem­plants, Rom. 1.19, 20.

The opinion of Gabriel Vasques, mentioned only, and tou­ched aslope by our Aduersarie, was this which followeth:

First, There is not any thing in the world, which we may not sincerely adore, and God himselfe in the same Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. Disp. 6. c. 3. n. 180. Nulla est res mundi, &c. [...] sin­cere adorare non possumus..

Secondly, One may, according to right and sincere faith, consider God internally present in euerie Creature, and wor­ship God in it, and with it Ib. li. 3. Disp. 1. c. 2. n. 8. & 9. Si imaginem pictam, quae ratione & anima caret, rite adoramus, eo quod ex­emplar C representatum cogitatione cum ea coniungimus, nec solum imaginem, sed vestem etiam reipsa sepera­tam à Rege, consideratione tamen cum eo coniunctam colimus, sicut Iacob dum osculabatur vestem filij sui Ioseph, ipsum affectu honoris & amoris [...] Quid quaeso obstare potest, quo minus quamcun (que) rem mundi cum Deo, qui in ea est secundum essentiam, & quam continuo virture sua conseruat, secluso periculo, adorare & colere possimus? ei (que) corpus inclinantes, & osculum infigentes, in Deum ipsum illius authorem toto spiritu sicut in prototypon Imaginis feramur? Cur quaeso non poterit quisque recta & sincera fide, Deum in qualibet re inti­me presentem considerans, in ipsa, & cum ipsa adorare. Ib. n. 10. Quis (que) fidelis apud se considerans terram hanc, quam calcamus esse scabellum pedum Domini, ad terram se inclinate, & prosternere potest. Ib. n. 14. Concedit Leo potuisse aliquem inclinata ceruice ipsi soli, &c. Ib. c. 5. n. 33..

Thirdly, It is lawfull to worship the Earth, as Gods foot­stoole; and the Sunne as his Tabernacle, in the same manner as D Images, and other sacred things are worshipped.

Fourthly, He is no Idolater, which according to a good in­tention, worshippeth God in a stone, or in the rayes of the Sunne, although the deuill were there Ib. c. 5. n. 33. Sicut homoper la­pidé aut in lapide, potest Deum hac syntera fide colere, sic etiam in radio luminis, quod ap­paret, poterit ex recta circa Deum intentione & affectu, ipsum venerari, & quamuis ibi esset Daemon, ipsi nullo modo aut affectus seruitutis, aut ex­terior nota submissionis exhiberetur., or which adoreth the Asse Ib. Disp. 2. c. 6. n. 77. Posset asinus, &c. vpon which Christ sate. And if one worship God in a Crucifixe, wherein the deuill lurketh, hee need not ex­cuse himselfe, by saying, hee was ignorant of the deuils pre­sence; nor limit his Worship, by vsing any expresse con­dition Ib. n. 34. Non est ne­cessaria Ignoratio, vt ab Idololatriae crimine ille excusetur, qui in radio illo luminis, vel specie crucifixi sub qua Daemon delitescit, Deum Adorat. Quare nec conditionem expresse addere oportet, vt recte & legitime Adoratio fiat.. E

[Page 233] Fiftly, Although the former practise be lawfull, yet the same A may not be appointed to bee done promiscuously, by rude or vulgar people Ibid. cap. 2. pa. 397. Tamen non dicimus, [...] posse publicè adorandam populo proponi, &c..

Our Aduersarie is silent, concerning his owne iudgement about the former Doctrine. But if I may speake freely, accor­ding to my priuate opinion, I cannot perceiue why the Sunne, and the Moone, and the Earth, and the Asse, &c August. sup. Psal. 113. c. 2. Me­lior est etiam be­stia, &c. Quanto magis vel melius mures atque ser­pentes, & id genus [...] cole­rent? Clem. Alex. [...]. pag. 25. [...]. [...] quouis animali vi­liores sunt. Nam si quaedam animalia non habent omnes sensus, vt vernes & [...], &c. [...]. Statuae ociosae, inefficaces, inutiles, & insensiles, alligantur, & clauis confi­guntur, & compinguntur limantur, secantur, eraduntur, caelantur.. may not be worshipped together with God their maker, vpon as good, and better reason, than Pictures and Statues, which are formed by Craftesmen, and haue no force or operation in them. I am B taught also by learned Vasques, that the deuill in very substance, may lurke in Images; and my Aduersarie cannot prooue, that Christ is present or assistant to them. Now it seemeth vnrea­sonable to worship that which may receiue the deuill: when on the other side, one cannot be certaine, that it may haue any fellowship with Christ, 2. Cor. 6.16.

IESVIT. C

Nor doth it follow, That if wee worship the Image of Christ, and the Crosse that he died on, that we should also adore Iudas his lips, which touched our Sauiours sacred mouth, when he gaue him that trayterous kisse. For it is easie to shew many differences betwixt Judas his lips, and the Crosse.

First, Iudas his lips were conioyned substantially with D Iudas, that none could bow or bend vnto them and kisse them, without seeming to bow and doe honour to his person: In regard he being an intellectuall Creature, was an obiect capable of veneration, terminated and stayed in his owne person. But the Crosse being a sencelesse thing, is not an ob­iect sufficient to stay veneration within it selfe; neither is it a part belonging to the substance of any wicked man, that concurred to the punishing of our Sauiour, but rather was E fixed vnto, and ioyned with his Bodie: and so the outward bowing to the Crosse, is done mentally onely vnto Christ, whom we behold as stretched thereon.

[Page 234] Secondly, the Crosse, the Nailes, the Launce, and other A such instruments being sencelesse creatures, may be thought of as things sanctified by the touch of our Sauiours bodie, not hauing in them any thing contrarie to the sanctitie of Christ, and so could not hinder the conceipt of such impu­ted sanctitie. But Iudas being most wicked and detestable, and full of the most horrible treason that euer was, did so defile and prophane his whole person, and all the parts thereof, that the meere touch of our Sauiours most sacred B mouth could not sanctifie, nor make holy vnto Christian imagination his lips, without changing and sanctifying his heart; for so long as he continueth without repenting his treason, the liuely remembrance of that execrable fact doth so possesse a Christian heart, as no respectfull thought to him can enter vnto it.

Finally, the Passion of Christ may bee considered two waies: First, as proceeding from the will of wicked men, C the Diuels instruments, to torment him, in which considera­tion it is not gratefull vnto God, but a detestable sinne in the authors thereof: Secondly, it may be considered, as recei­ued in the bodie of Christ, as abiding and continuing in his sacred person, admitted in his heart, and offered to his Fa­ther for the sinnes of the world, and by this consideration it is sacred and venerable. The lips of Iudas betraying Christ, as the hands also of the wicked Minister, that D strucke him in Caiphas his house, and other like instru­ments conioined with wicked persons, were instruments of Christs passion, as it proceeded from their wicked hearts, and consequently as it was a detestable action; but the Crosse, the Nailes, and the Lance that stayed in, and were conioined vnto the bodie of Christ, were instruments of Christs Passion, as lodged in his sacred person, and as offe­red to his heauenly Father, and consequently as of a thing most highly venerable. E

ANSWER.

Admitting many differences betweene Iudas his lips, and the materiall Crosse, it followeth not, that the one may be wor­shipped, [Page 235] although the other may not: for there are many dif­ferences A betweene the brazen Serpent, and the Angell in the Reuelation, yet neither of these creatures might be religiously adored, 2. King. 18, 4. Apoc. cap. 19, & cap. 22.9. There are dif­ferences betweene the Sunne, and king Nabuchadonozer, yet nei­ther might be worshipped religiously.

Neither do the seuerall differences assigned by the Aduer­sarie, conclude: Not the first, because there was something in Iudas his lips susceptible of respect, which was not in the mate­riall Crosse, to wit, capacitie of Grace; for Iudas might haue repented, but an inanimate creature is not potentially suscep­tible B of sanctitie: Not the second, for by error an insensible creature may terminate adoration as well as an intellectuall, witnesse the idolatrie of Pagans. Thirdly, that the liuelesse and insensible Crosse, whereupon Christ suffered, was sancti­fied by his Passion, must be beleeued when diuine ordinance is produced, to make the same manifest. But for ought I can ob­serue, the Protestants vse not this obiection, taken from Iudas his lips Iunius. Ani­madu. ad. Bellarm. d. Imag. c. 30. n. 10. Haec a nobis nòn afferuntur, &c.: and some learned Papists affirme, that Iudas his lips might be reuerently kissed Vasq. d. Ador. lib. 3. disp. 2. cap. 6. n. 69. Nihil obstat quo minus aliquis C fincera fide & recta intentione affectum & animum in solùm Christum intendens, labia Iudae & alia quae iniu­stè Christum tetigerunt, reuerentèr osculetur, pag. 438. Lud. Paramo. d. Orig. inquis. lib. 2. tit. 3. ca 8. n. 55. Nihil obstat quo minus labia Iudae & alia, puta manum percutientem Saluatorem, quae iniustè Christum tetigerunt, aliquis sincera fide, & recta intentione, affectum & animum in Christum intendens, reuerentèr osculetur..

The last words, which are the Crosse, the Nailes, and the Lance that stayed in, and were ioined vnto the bodie of Christ, were instruments of Christs Passion, as lodged in his sacred Person, & as offered to his heauenly Father, affoord this Argu­ment following for the Iesuit: D

Those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion had a residence in Christs bodie, and were ioined thereunto as instruments of his Passion, and were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father, are thereby made most highly venerable.

But the Crosse, Nailes, and Lance were those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion, had a residence in Christs bodie, and were ioined thereunto as instruments of his Passion, and were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father, Ergo

The Crosse, Nailes, and Lance are thereby made most highly venerable. E

Both Propositions are false in whole, or in part. First, those things which at the instant time of Christs Pas­sion, had a residence in his bodie, and were ioined there­unto [Page 236] (per contactum phisicum) as instruments of his Passion, A were not thereby made most highly venerable, because there is no diuine authoritie, or any other snfficient reason to prooue this assertion.

Secondly, these things were seperate instruments, and not perpetually conioined to his person, and if none did worship them when they were actually conioined, there is no reason to thinke that they are to be worshipped being diuided. If ap­parrell when it is ioined to an honourable person, may be co­worshipped with the person, yet when it is diuided from the B person, and hangeth in a wardrobe, or is worne by a Page, it is otherwise Peres. Aiala. d. Diu. Trad. p. 3. d. Imag. Si purpura ab eo seperetur, quamuis ab aliquo cognoscatur vt Re­gis purpura, non o­pus est vt eadé ve­neratione tunc ve­neretur, qua ipse Imperator. Aug. d. verb. Dom. serm. 58. Si quis nostrū aut C [...] aut diadema regale iacens inueniat, nunquid [...] conabitur adorare?. Whiles God appeared to Moses in the bramble bush, the ground whereon Moses stood is called holy, Exod. 3.6. But this holinesse being only relatiue, transitorie, and de­nominatiue, and not inherent or durable, the former vision and apparition being finished, the ground whereon Moses stood returned to his old condition. The like may be said of the wa­ter of Iordan, considered when Christ was baptised with it, and againe considered, when his baptisme was finished, and out of the vse.

An Embassador during his embassage, is a publicke and ho­nourable person; when his office ceaseth, the honour consecta­rie and dependant vpon his office ceaseth also.

Secondly, the latter branch of the assumption, to wit, the Crosse, Nailes, and Lance were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father at his Passion, is impiously false, for nothing was offered by Christ to his heauenly Father at his Passion, but himselfe, and part of himselfe, Heb. 7.27. [...], he offered vp himselfe, D Heb. 9. 14. [...], through the eternall Spirit he offered himselfe without spot to God, &c. Heb. 10. 10. Wee are sanctified through the offering of the body of lesus Christ, once for all, 1. Pet. 2.24. Col. 1.22. Heb. 9.12. By his owne bloud he entred once into the holy place, &c. 1. Pet. 1. 19. And if the Crosse, Nailes, and Lance were offered by Christ to his Father, then we were redeemed with corruptible things, contrarie to the Apostles doctrine, 1. Pet. 1. 18, and Wood, Nailes, and Yron were a part of the propitiatorie Sacrifice for the sinnes of the whole world; which is a Iesuiticall, or rather an Antijesuine E doctrine, that is, a doctrine ascribing to dead creatures, Yron, Wood, Steele, Nailes, &c. that which is most proper to the pretious blood of Iesus. This doctrine (maintained by Loio­lists) is most sacrilegious, and more to be abhorred than Iudas [Page 237] his lips. But it is fulfilled in these men, which Clement Alexan­drinus A saith of heathen Idolaters, [...]? are they not prodigious monsters which adore stockes and stones?

IESVIT.

Out of which J may conclude, that Christ Iesus being a true man, his Image hath a most euident and vndeniable right to represent him, and so to be honoured for his sake. B

ANSVVER.

Conclusions borrow their strength from their premises but the former premises haue no power to inforce this conclusion.

For although Christ is a true man, yet his painted Image wanteth euident and vndeniable right to represent him; be­cause such right presupposeth diuine institution. The same re­presents him and stands for him, only by humane imagination (which is all the Aduersarie is able to prooue) but religious worship must haue a more sound and certaine foundation, C otherwise we must say to Papals, when they are thus prodigall in giuing Christs honour to Idols, [...], Ioh. 4. 22. ye worship ye know not what.

If in ciuile worship, one should frame an Image, or chaire of State, in honour of a king, and commaund people to kneele and bow to it, none will be so foolish as to obey, vnlesse such commandement be deriued from the kings authoritie, or law. But in things religious and heauenly, men haue not the same li­bertie of deuising, and commanding, as appeareth by Gedeons Ephod, Iudg. 8.27 Aug. q. 41. sup. li. Iud. p. 415. Cum Idolum non fuerit, id est cuiusquè Dei falsi & alieni simulachrum, sed Ephod, id est vnum de Sacramentis Taber­naculi, quod ad vestem Sacerdotalem pertineret, quomodo fornication em Scriptura dicat populi ista sectan­tis atquè venerantis? Ideò scilicet, quod praeter Tabernaculum Dei vbi erantista, quae sibi fieri iusserat Deus Israel, extra simile aliquid fieri fas non erat.. D

Lastly, if it should be granted that artificiall Images did re­present, figure, or teach Christ Iesu by diuine institution, as fully as the Bookes of holy Scripture, or as the inward conceits and images of the mind Apud. Cabrer, 3. q. 25. ar. 3. n. 28. Si Imagines essent co­lendae eadem ado­ratione qua exem­plaria, sequeretur etiàm internas Imagines, vt conceptus & phantasmata, esse codem cultu adorandas Internae enìm Imagines, mul­to perfectiùs repraesentant ipsum exemplar, quam Imagines externae. [...] istae solum representant corporis lineamenra, conceptus verò, naturam specificam ipfius viuentis., yet it were inconsequent to inferre that the same were therefore to be worshipped in such man­ner E as Papals require. They were indeed to be vsed with reue­rence, but reuerent vsing and adoration are diuers actions.

IESVIT. §. 2. A

THis Worship was euer since the Apostles in the Church without beginning.

ANSVVER.

IF it had no beginning, how can this man prooue, that the B Apostles were the Authors?

IESVIT.

The disagreeing of Protestants, about the time when Worship of Jmages began, is a sufficient Argument, That there is no beginning thereof assigneable.

ANSVVER.

The Iesuits Proposition is: Worship of Images hath beene C practised in the true Church euer since the Apostles, &c. His first Argument to confirme this, is,

If Protestants disagree, in assigning the time, when the wor­ship of Images first began in the Church: Then the worship of Images was practised vniuersally and perpetually from the A­postles dayes.

But Protestants disagree in assigning the time when the Wor­ship of Images first began in the Church. Ergo D

The worship of Images was practised vniuersally and perpe­tually from the Apostles dayes: and consequently the same wor­ship, is to be receiued and practised in these dayes.

First, The consequence of the Maior Proposition is denied: For is it not ridiculous to argue in this manner? Learned Pa­pists disagree, in assigning the time when Heathenish Idolatrie first began: Therefore Heathenish Idolatrie had his beginning in Paradise.

But learned Papists, Bellarmine, Pererius, Barradias, &c. dis­agree, E in assigning and pointing foorth the moment of time when Heathenish Idolatrie fist began Bellarm. d. verb. Dei. lib. 1. cap. 13. Barrad. Harmon. Euang. tom. 4. lib. 10. cap. 12. Perer. in Genes. lib. 15. cap. 10. Disp. 5. n. 80..

[Page 239] The time, when people first began to offer their sonnes and A daughters to diuells, is not assigneable. And who can certaine­ly report, when barbarous people first began to eate mans flesh? or when the Assyrian matrons began first to prostitute them­selues, at the temple of Venus [...]. Clio. li. 1. pa. 81. Vna ijs­dem Babilonijs lex est; omnibus mo­dis faeda: nempè omnibus mulieribus indiginis commune est, semel in vita, ad veneris templum desidentibus, cùm externis viris consuerudinem habere. Ad templum veneris sedent, &c. Hospitem autèm illum, &c. dicere oportet, [...] tibi Deam milittam imploro. Milittam enim Assirij venerem apellant.? Is it therefore consequent, that these customes had their beginning from Noahs dayes, be­cause their originall is not assigneable?

Our aduersaries Achilles therefore (Protestants are not able B out of approoued Historians to assigne the persons and time, who, and when, began the worship of images in the Church: Ergo, the said custome is originally from the Apostles) rather deserueth contempt and derision, than an accurate solution.

2. The assumption of the former argument is also denyed: For Protestants disagree not in assigning the time when worship of images was first of all imposed, as an article of faith: for the second Nicene Synod, celebrated after the yeare 790. did first decree this practise. And yet, if it be admitted, that there C were some difference of opinion betweene Protestants in mat­ter of Chronologie, and about point of time, this is no argu­ment of palpable vntruth (as our aduersarie declames,) for we finde as great difference in the Fathers, and among Papists themselues, in sundry passages of this nature Horant. loc. li 5. ca. 3. Patres illi sancti, nonnulla in libris suis [...], & credide­runt, [...] humanum sensum innixi opinionibus hominum, presertim in describendis historijs, rebusque alijs gestis re­censendis, D &c. Ireneus per auditum tantum [...], Christum post [...] aetatis suae annum pas­sum, &c.. But now let vs further examine, in what manner the obiectour prooueth, that Protestants disagree about the time when worship of images began.

IESVIT.

But because it were long to set downeall their disagreeing assertions, I will onely declare what M r. Iohn White, brother to my Aduersarie, in his booke printed and reprin­ted many times, saith thereabout, that your Maiestie may by this example vnderstand, with how little sinceritie the best E esteemed Protestant Ministers handle controuersies, to the deception of many Christian soules. First there was no image, [...] in his Way. pa. 151. 152. either grauen or painted (saith Erasmus Jn. [...].) no not the image of Christ himselfe to be set in Churches, and this [Page 240] appeareth by the testimony of the ancients Epiph. Epist. ad Iohan. Concil. Elibert. c. 36.. Secondly, when A they began to be vsed, the Church of Rome forbad the wor­ship of them, as appeareth by the Epistles of Gregory Epist. 10, 11. lib. 7. to Serenus; and Polydore De Iuuent. li. 6. [...] a Papist confesseth, all Fathers condemned the worship of Images for feare of Idolatrie. Afterward the Councell of Nice brought in their worship, decreeing neuerthelesse, that no image should bee adored with Latria, diuine honour. At the last Thomas Aqui­nas 3. Pa. q. 25. ar. 3. 4., and the Trent Councell Sess. 25. expounded by the Iesuits Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. c. 4. Suar. in 3. p. to. 1. disp. 54. sect. 4., B taught that diuine honour should be giuen vnto them. Thus he, which in my iudgement is sufficient to make any iuditious man mislike Protestant Writers, that defend their Religion by such palpable vntruths. For (to begin with his last say­ing, and so vpward) what can be more false, than that the Councell of Trent taught, that diuine worship is to be giuen vnto images, there being no such words in the whole Coun­cell? As for the Iesuit Vasq. whom he citeth as so expoun­ding Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. Disp. 9 c. 3. Nullus [...] ne­que patrum sie loquitur Imagini Christi aut Trini­tatis [...] [...] in 3. pa. to. 1. disp. 54. sect. 3. ad [...] Ille a. ctus [...] pro­totypi est [...] latria, &c tespectu vero Imaginisnon est tam perfecta adoratio sed infe­rior veneratio. C the Councell, no such doctrine is found in him, either in the place quoted by the Minister, or in any other part of his workes, yea the contrary is found. It is not (quoth he) to be said, that diuine honour is giuen vnto images. Neither doth Suarez the other Jesuit cyted, expound the Councell to giue diuine worship vnto Christs image; but onely saith that out of the Councell it may be gathered, that the image of Christ, and Christ, are honoured by one and the same act of worship: which as referred vnto Christ [...] diuine wor­ship; D as referred to the image, not diuine worship but inferi­our veneration. For as he declareth the worship of Christ and his image, though one, and the same Phisicall act, is two­fold, being diuine honour towards Christ, not diuine but an inferiour kind of honour towards the image.

ANSWER.

This discourse reduced into forme of Argument is: E

M r. Iohn White had dealt vnfaithfully in his narration, of the opinions of learned Papists, touching the comming in, and worship of Images. Ergo,

[Page 241] Protestants disagree about the time, when the worship of A Images began.

A miserable and most inept consequence, as all men learned and vnlearned may perceiue: for if it were true, that [...]. Iohn White, or some other Protestant Minister, had erred in re­porting the doctrine of the Trident Synod, and in relating the opinion of Suares and Vasques; doth it follow from hence, that Protestants disagree, in assigning the time when Image-worship began to be enioyned, as a necessary dutie, and the doctrine thereof determined as an article of faith? But omitting the se­quele B of the argument, which is loose and disioynted, let vs examine the antecedent.

Thomas Aquinas, and the Trident Councell (saith M r. Iohn White) as it was expounded by Iesuits (meaning also other learned Pontificians) taught that diuine worship, or Latria, should be giuen vnto them, &c.

I answer: Aquin. his words are so plaine, that an intelligent man cannot conceiue his meaning to be other than as the letter of the wordssoundeth Aquin. 3. q. 25. ar. 3. in c. Cas­sand. consult. d. Imag. pa. 989. O­pinio D. Tho. &c. Asserentis [...] Christi adoran­dam latria. Picus Mirand. Apol. q. 3. Grux Christi & imagines sunt a­dorandae latria [...] modo quo ponit Thomas, &c. Cum Christus adoretur adoratione latriae, consequens est quod eius imago sit adoratione latriae adoranda, Because Christ C himselfe is adored with diuine honour, it is consequent, that his image is to be adored with the worship of Latria. 2. The de­termination of the Trident Councell, in this and in many other articles, is like Apollo his riddles and responsalls, a nose of waxe, and so ambiguous, that not onely M r. White, but veterane Papists themselues are perplexed in resoluing the mysteries thereof. Now thething which induced M r. White to conceiue that the said Councell approoued the opinion of Thomas and other schoole­men, touching adoration of Images with diuine worship, was, not onely the silence of these Trent masters, in condemning D that grosse errour: but especially, the practise of many late Pontificians, which propugne Aquinas his Tenet, affirming, that the same is agreeable to the Councells definition. Henriquez a Iesuit saith: Henriquez. sum. Theol. mor. li. 8. c. 32. Male quidā negant prae­dicandum populo, quod imago Chri­sti, sit adoranda, la­tria. Falso, Ca­therinus, & quidam alias aiunt, si D. Thomas vidisset synodum septimam, non esset concessurus [...] E Christi adorati latria, sed hyperdulia. Some (of our part) doe euill, in denying, that it is not meet to preach to common people, That the image of Christ is to be ado­red with diuine honour. Suarez Suar. in 3. to. 1. disp. 54. Sect. 4. Dicendum ergo, primo est, fieri recte posse, vt Prototypon in imagine, & imago cum prototypo vno actu adoretur, [...] hoc modo posse imaginem Christi [...] latria. Ib. Posse tamen coadorari, sicut humanitas Christi coado­ratur verbo, purpura Regis adoratur honore Regio. hath these words, It may rightly be, that the image, and the Prototype, may be adored with one act, and in this manner the image of Christ may be adored with Latria. Vas­ques [Page 242] Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 8. c. 14. n. 385. Quod si cum Caietano aliquis vsurpet Imagi­nem, vt ille loqui­tur formaliter, vt exercet actum I­maginis, hoc est pro exemplari ip­so in imagine, vel pro imagine prout continet exem­plar, & [...] ipso quasi animata est: dicendum est sine dubio [...] veram la­triā in spiritu pro dignitate prototy­pi exhiberi. Idem in 3. p. Tho. q 25. ar. 3. disp. 109. ca. 1. Veteres Schola­stici absolute di­cunt, Jmagines Christi & Trinita­tis esse colendas a­doratione [...]. saith, if an image be taken formally, as it exerciseth the act of A an image, that is; for the very sampler in the image, and for the image as it containeth the sampler, and is as it were animated by it; then with­out doubt we must say, that true Latria, in spirit, is exhibited vnto it. Iacobus de Graphijs Iac. de Graph. Decis. Aur. p. 1. li. C 2. c. 2. n. 15. [...] imaginem, codem cultu quo illi cuius imago est veneremur, id est vt imagini Dei vel Christi vel & Crucis signo, proutdominicam passionem ad mentem reuocat, latriam impartiamur. Thyraeus. Append. ad li. d. Spir. Appar. c. 2. n. 10. B. Augustinus humanam Christi naturam quae filio vnita est cultu latriae adorari posse, docet exemplo purpurae Regiae, quam simul cū Rege tuto adoramus: & non [...] idem [...] deo ipsiusque Imagini exhiberi; quando ipsa Deum representat, animusque inter deum & ipsam non distinguit? Sed deum & cum Imagine, & in imagine, & per Imaginem videt? hath these words, We are to worship euery image with the same worship wherewith the Sampler is worshipped, to wit, the image of God, or Christ, or signe of the Crosse (as it bringeth the Lords Passion into our mind) with the worship of Latria. The same is affirmed by Ludovicus Paramo Par. d. Orig. Inquis. li. 2. tit. 3. c. 8. n. 9. Compertum est, ca signum hoc Crucis, dignitate atque praestantia pollere, vt non alia quam adorati­one soli Deo exhibenda colatur, & adoretur: quae [...] latriae dicitur [...]., Bernardus Puiol [...]. d. Ador. disp. 3. Sect. 6. Imagines rerum sacrarum sunt adorandae adoratione sacra & religiosa, sicut adoratur prototypus. Jb. sect. 7. Assert. 7. Dum adoratur Imago Christi, illa imago est adoranda adoratione latriae. Ib. Latria est du­plex absoluta & respectiua, & haec licet minus perfecte, est proprie latria non minus quam illa.. Fran­ciscus Petigianis Petig. Sum. 3. Sent. dist. 9. q 1. ar. 3. Haec est communis sententia, quae asserit, quod imago Christi, eadem adoratione est adoranda, qua ipsemet Christus: & idem dicendum est de alijs imaginibus, quatenus repraesentant prototy­pum, quod [...] eadem adoratione venerandae sunt, qua & representata per ipsas., Petrus de Cabrera Cabrer. in 3. p. Thom. D q: 25. ar. 3. disp. 3. §. 2. Secunda sententia [...], eandem prorsus adorationem exhibendam esse imaginibus, & rebus ipsis per imagines representatis, ita vt imago Christi sit adoranda latria, qua ipse Christus colitur. Azor. Inssit. moral. to. 1. li. 9. c. 6. Archang. Rubeo in 3. Sent. dist. 9. L. Lamas, Sum, eccles. p. 3. c. 3. pa. 265. [...]. Elys. clyp. pa. 242., Azorius, L. Lamas, Thom. Elysius. Arch. Rubeo. Tho. Bustus, &c. And whereas the foresaid B Authors in their larger disputations vse many distinctions Per se & per accidens. Absoluta, Respectiua, propria impropria, propriè Analogicè. Veliosil. Aduert. in 2. Tom. Aug. q. 9. Aduertendum, quod nobis imagines non tantum seruiunt quasi [...], in memoriam diuos ipsos reducentes, nam scripturas & sanctorum nomina non adoramus, sed Deum & sanctos qui per illam representantur De imaginibus vero longe aliter sentiendum est, non enim nos tantum eleuant, vt sanctos adoremus: in hunc enim vsum nullus Haereticorum imagines [...], sed easdem ipsas debemus adorare. Non enim tantum ait [...], [...] Christum adoramus, sed tuam crucem, & eidem Cruci ait O Crux aue spes vnica, non autem adorantur in quantum lapides sunt, aut ligna, aut quaeuis alia mate­ria, [...] in quantum Dei Sanctorumue formae in illis existunt, quo fit vt vnaquaeque imago, eodem sit cultu adoranda, quo [...] ipsa, vt imago Dei & Christi adoratione latriae, &c. Turrecrem. Sup. Decret. d. Consecr. dist 3. ca. Venerabiles., wherein they may seeme to qualifie the hardnesse of former as­sertions, yet if they intend not to giue such honour to images, as their generall speeches import, they are rather to be accused, and taken at the worst, which giue occasion, than Protestants blamed as mistaking their meaning: their distinctions being (as Bellarm. d. Imag. c. 22. Qui defendunt Imagines adorari latria, coguntur vti [...] distinctionibus, quas vix ipsimet intelligunt, nedum populus imperitus. E Bellarmine speaketh) so subtle and intricate, that not onely vul­gar persons, but the Authors themselues scarce vnderstand them.

But the question, whether images be to bee adored with di­uine worship, or not, and all the rest of this section, concerning [Page 243] M r. Iohn White, is heterrogeneous to this disputation, as ap­peares A by the former Analysis. It is sufficient for vs to shew, that Papists adore and worship Images, with some kind of re­all worship [...]. d. Ado­rat. disp. 3. sect. 7. Quarto colligitur contra Durand. ip­sas Imagines pro­prie adorari, quia verba Concilij ab­solute prolata, pro­prie sunt intelli­genda. Cabrer. in 3. p. Tho. q. 25. ar. 3. §. 1. n. 14. Op­positam sententiam tenet D. Thom. hic, & omnes eius dis­cipuli, nempe Ima­gines vere ac pro­prie adorari, saltem vt obiectum mate­riale Adorationis, vel totale velsaltem [...]., to wit, such as the Trident Councell expresly defineth [...]. Trid. Sess. 25. Eisque de­bitum [...] & venerationem esse impartiendam.: for if such adoration of Images bee an Article of Faith, and not onely a thing Adiaphorous, but a necessarie du­tie [...]. d. Ador. d. 3. sect. 7. Adoratio Imaginis non est Actus indifferens, sed intrinsece bo­nus., then the same must haue apparant ground in Diuine Re­uelation Orig. c. Celsum. lib. 7. Nemo qui cernit animae oculis, alio modo Deum colit, quam sicut ipse docuit.; but if it be neuer commanded or prescribed in the Old or New Testament, nor was for sundrie ages affirmed by Orthodoxall Fathers, to be an Apostolicall Tradition, and yet the Trent Councell presumeth to make it diuine, obliging all B Christians, vpon paine of damnation, to the beliefe and practise thereof; Protestants haue iust cause to condemne this doctrine, and to refuse conformitie with Papists, in the practise thereof. Papists condemne those of heresie, which refuse to worship Images, where they haue power, they burne them to Ashes Sixt. [...]. Bibl. li. 5. Annot. 247. Balthasar Hinc marus viennae exustus. [...]. fum. l. 8. c. 32. AEgidius vir doctus, qui combustus eft, &c. Compulsus est retractare hanc propositionem: Imaginem Christi & eius crucem non adorari Latria. D: They hold it lawfull to dethrone Kings and Princes from their royall dignitie, for opposing this practise [...]. d. Ador. disp. 3. sect. 6. pag. 274. Vnde potius Regno Franciae venisset Charolus priuandus si Irono­machus fuisset, vt predicti Imperatores imperio [...] priuati, quam occidentis eligendus Imperator. Platin. in vit. Gregor. 3. Hic statim [...] inijt Cleri Romani consensu [...] Imperatorem Con­ftantinopolitanum imperio [...] & communione fidelium priuat, quod sanctas Imagines [...] sacris aedibus abra­fisset & statuas demolitus esset. [...]. Castr. c. [...]. li. 8. ver. Imago. Tapia in 3. p. Tho. q. 27. ar. 6. pag. 330.. It must therefore be neces­sarie for them to demonstrate their Tenet by manifest Testi­monies or Arguments, taken from diuine Reuelation, and not to triflle off the time, in bequarrelling Iohn White, concerning C the meaning of the Trident Councell. For it is apparant, that the Councell intendeth to make that an Article of [...], which hath no foundation in the rule of Faith, and it yeeldeth liber­tie to the most grosse opinions, which former Papists held con­cerning adoration of Images Azor. Instit. Mor. to. 1. li. 9. c. 6. Secunda opinio affirmat (Imagines) coli [...] adoratione Latriae, &c. [...] communi est. Theologorum consensu recepta. Sic Thomas, Alexander, Bonauentura, Richardus, [...], Paludanus, Almain, Marsilius, [...], [...], & [...].. And it is sufficient for Prote­stants to manifest thus much.

IESVIT.

Nor is Maister Whites Argument good, We worship Iohn White, in his Way. pag. 400. Christ and his Image by the same Act: but the worship of E Christ, is diuine honour, Ergo, The worship of the Image is diuine honour: for this prooueth [...], That the worship of the Image is diuine, as referred to Christ, not as refer­red [Page 244] vnto the Image. Otherwise if Maister White should A helpe to pull his fellow Ministers horse out of the mire, [...] thereunto out of Christian charitie and friendship, one might by the like Argument prooue, that he beareth Christi­an charitie towards horses; for he relieueth the horse, and pleasureth his friend, by one and the same Act. The pleasu­ring of his friend, is an Act of Christian charitie towards him. Ergo, The pulling the horse out of the mire, is an Act of Christian charitie towards the horse. A foolish Argu­ment, B because that one Act is vertually twofold, as referred to the man, owner of the horse, Christian charity; as referred to the horse onely, no charitie at all, but a baser kind of loue, and that for his friends sake. The like is, when wee kisse with our corporall lips the feet of the Image of Christ: at the same time by deuout and reuerent imagination, kissing his true feet, represented by the Image, we honour Christ and his Image by one and the same Physicall Act, and that Act is diuine Worship, though not diuine as referred to the C Image, but onely as referred vnto Christ. A thing so easily vnderstood by learned men, as I meruaile Ministers vn­derstand it not, or will wrangle in a matter so cleare, if they sincerely seeke truth.

ANSWER.

The Argument which you father vpon Maister Iohn White, D and whereunto you apply your flearing and myerie simili­tude, is not extant in his Way to the Church, pag. 400. So farre therefore as I can obserue, you fight with your owne shaddow.

But if the Argument had beene propounded in this manner: Many learned Papists (to wit, Aquinas, and the Maior part of the Schoole [...]. to. 1. In­stit. Moral. l. 9. c. 6. Secunda opinio, &c.) adore the Artificiall Images of Christ, as they are conioyned with the Samplar, with the Act of Latria; Therefore they adore some Images with Diuine worship: I cannot perceiue, that your nice distinctions of Physicall and ver­tuall E acts, diuine, as referred to Christ, not diuine, as referred to the Image, would haue beene sufficient to vindicate your Tenet, from the mud of superstition: for that which is worshipped with any act (matorially, or formally) of Latria, is worshipped [Page 245] with diuine honour Vasq. in 3. Tho. q. 25. ar. 3. Disp. 108. n. 97. Licet haec a­doratio imaginis secundū se, sit [...] secundarius Latriae, ob id tamen negari non debet, simpli­citer & proprie esse Latriam. Suares 3. Tho. to. 1. Disp. 54. sect. 4. Quamuis creatura, non possit per se [...] adorari Latria, posset tamen coadorari, sicut humanitas Christi coadoratur verbo, purpura Regis adoratur honore Regio: Dices hoc habere locum in ijs, quae aliquo modo vnum constituant cum persona adorata, Imago autem non facit vnum cum exemplari. Sed hoc nihil ob­stat, quia Imago & exemplar sunt vnum habitudine, &c. B, at least, in part, or by accident. But no A degree of diuine honour can iustly be yeelded to any creature, which is not substantially vnited to the Deitie, or at least wise, which is not by some diuine Ordinance, accidentally vnited, and made capable of such adoration. But no artificiall Ima­ges are thus vnited, and no diuine ordinance exalteth them to such a dignitie.

IESVIT.

And though the Ignorant vnderstand not the Adoratio rela­tiua & absoluta, per Accidens, Analo­gicè impropriè. tearmes of Theologie, by which Diuines declare the manner of ho­nouring the Prototype and the Jmage both by one Act, yet may they honour an Jmage as securely, and with as little danger and erring, as any that vnderstand them. For as the Clowne, who knowes no more of the nature of motion, C than that he is to set one foot before another, doth mooue in the very same manner as Philosophers, who [...] that Action by tearmes most obscure, of intrinsecall and extrinse­call, beginning and ending, and per vltimum non esse, & primum non [...]: So likewise a Catholicke, that vnder­stands no more of honouring Christ his Image, than that he is by beholding the Jmage to remember Christ, and with pi­ous and affectuous imaginations to adore him, doth honour D our Sauiour and his Image, by one and the same Act, as tru­ly, verily, and religiously, as the greatest Diuine that can learnedly explicate the manner how that Adoration is per­formed, as being done outwardly, relatiuely, and transitori­ly vnto the Image, inwardly, affectuously, absolutely, finally vnto Christ.

ANSWER.

Although this Assertion is false, and the Proofe thereof E borrowed from a similie, is impertinent: (for vulgar persons among you, commit grosse Idolatrie in Image Worship, as they which haue liued beyond Seas, and some of your own part report; neither is there the same reason of naturall motion, [Page 246] and the exercise of religious actions:) yet because it serueth A not to prooue the Assumption of your maine Sillogisme, to wit, Protestants cannot assigne any time when Image worship began, &c. I will not insist vpon the examination of it.

The latter branch of this Clause, to wit, Adoration is perfor­med to Images, as being done outwardly, relatiuely, and transitorily vnto the Image; inwardly, affectuously, absolutely, and finally, vnto Christ, is boldly affirmed, but not confirmed by any Argument.

First, how proue you, by diuine reuelation and testimonie, that adoration is to be performed, according to your distincti­on of outwardly, relatiuely, and transitorily to Images? And B against such loose and voluntarie presumptions, we say with S. Chrisostome, Diuinae Scripturae testimonia sequamur, neque feramus Chrysoft. sup. Gen. hom. 5. eos qui timerè quiduis blaterant, we are to follow [...], te­stimonie of diuine Scripture; and not to regard them, which at rouers, and without ground blatter out what they please.

Secondly, if you adore Images outwardly, relatiuely, and transitorily, then you make Images a partiall obiect of adorati­on: but God himselfe, who saith, I will not giue my glorie to ano­ther, (to wit, in whole or in part) neither my praise to grauen Ima­ges, C ( Esa. 42.8.) hath excluded Images from copartnership with himselfe in adoration.

IESVIT.

Secondly, whereas he saith that the Councell of Nice, brought in the worship of Jmages, yet forbad that any Image should be adored with diuine honor; he both contra­dicts himselfe, and vttereth another manifest falshood. D He contradicts himselfe, in saying that the Nicene Councell forbad diuine worship of any Images: Seeing in another place he thus writeth, Both the Councell of Nice, and the Diuines of the Church of Rome, hold the Jmages of God, Defence, pag. 453. and our Sauiour, and the Crosse, must be adored with diuine adoration. It is apparantly false, that the said Nicene Councell brought in the worship of Jmages, which might be prooued by many testimonies, but this only may suffice, that Zonaras in Leone Isaurico. E Leo Isauricus before the Councell of Nice opposed Image worship, not as then beginning, but for many yeares before established in the Church; boasting that he was the first Christian Emperor, the rest hauing beene Idolaters, because [Page 247] they worshipped Images: so manifestly did he oppose Anti­quitie, A and so little truth there is in M. Whites Assertion.

ANSWER.

The second Nicene Synod brought in the worship of Ima­ges, not simply, but by defining the same to be necessarie, and by appointing the practise thereof to be receiued vniuersally: otherwise M. Iohn White was not ignorant, that the Israelites worshipped molten Images in Dan and Bethell, and the Simo­nians worshipped Images, Eusebius Eccles. Hist. lib. 2. ca. 13. and B the Gnostickes worshipped Christ his Image, Iren. lib. 2. cap. 24. And Marcellina worshipped the Images of Iefu and Paul, &c. Aug. d. Haer. 7. Haeres. The Marsilians also, or people thereabout, worshipped Images, in the daies of Serenus, Greg. li. 7. Epist. 109. & lib. 9. Epist. 9. But all these were condemned of superstiti­on by the Catholicke Church: and the second Nicene Sy­nod was censured, and the definition thereof resisted by many, as I haue formerly prooued, pag. 210. And because the Iesuit re­hearseth a storie out of Zonaras (an Author which themselues C regard not Posseuin. Ap­parat. & Biblioth. Select. lib. 16. ca. 19. Is certè in historia, &c. inepte at (que) os­citantèr pleraquè scripsit, &c.) I will requite him with a more certaine Historie out of Roger Houeden Roger Houe­den, pars 1. Annal. fol. 272. col. 2. Anno 792. Carolus Rex Francorū [...] Sy­nodalem librum ad [...] sibi à Constātinopoli di­rectum, in quo li­bro (heu proh do­lor) [...] incon­uenientia, & verae [...] contraria reperiebantur, maximè, quod penè omnium orientalium Doctorum, non mi­nus quam trecentorum, vel eò amplius Episcoporum, vnanima assertione comfirmatum fuerit Imagines adorari [...], quod [...] Ecclesia Dei execratur. Contra quod scripsit Albinus Epistolam ex authoritate diuina­rum [...] mirabilitèr affirmatam, illamquè cum eodem libro, ex persona Episcoporum ac Principum no­strorum Regi [...] attulit., a natiue Historian of the affaires of Britaine, his words are these. Charles the French king sent a Synodal into Britaine, directed vnto him from Constantinople, in the which booke many things (out alas) inconuenient, and repugnant to right Faith, were found: especially it was confirmed almost by the vna­nimous consent of all the Easterne Doctours, no lesse than three hun­dred or more, That Images ought to be worshipped; which thing the Church of God doth altogether detest. Against which Synodal Booke, Albinus wrote an Epistle, marueilously confirmed by authoritie of D diuine Scripture, and carried the same to the French king, together with the foresaid Booke, in the name of our Bishops and Princes.

IESVIT.

Thirdly, to passe yet vp higher, That Images began in Gregorie the Great his time, and that he forbad the E worship of them, containes other three falshoods.

First, Gregorie is abused, who onely commanded that none should worship Images as Gods, [...] as Gentiles [Page 248] did, Li. 7. Ep. 53. Non vt eam tanquā De­um colas. Et lib. 7. Ep. 5. Act. Rom. Pontif. Prin­ted at Basile, 1558. pa. 45. Symonds on the Reuelations pa. 57. Bale in Pageant of Popes, pa. 24. & 25. that some Godhead was affixed vnto them, as he else­where A declareth himselfe. And so manifestly did he teach Image worship, establishing Pilgrimages vnto them by Indulgences, as Frier Bale accuseth him thereof. Yea M. Symonds and M. Bale write, that Leo an hundred and fortie yeares before Gregorie decreed the worship of Images.

ANSWER.

Gregories words are Imagines adorare omnibus modis deuita, By Lib. 9. Epist. 9. B all meanes shunne the worshipping of Images. Aliud est Pi­cturam adorare, aliud per Picturae historiam, quid sit adorandum ad­discere, It is one thing to worship a Picture, another by the sto­rie of the Picture, to learne what is to be worshipped. Non ad adorandum in Ecclesijs, sed ad instruendas solummodo mentes fuit nescientium collocatum, It was placed in the Church only to in­struct the minds of the ignorant, and not to be worshipped. And in another Epistle, Quatenus literarum nescij, haberent vndè Lib. 7. Epist. 109. scientiae historiam colligerent. First, in these passages of S. Grego­rie, we find no vse of Images allowed, but onely historicall. C Secondly, he saith positiuely, They are not set vp to be worship ped, but onely to instruct the ignorant. And although in the Lib. 7. Epist. 53. place obiected, he saith, Non vt quasi Deum colas, Not that thou shouldest worship them as God; yet he doth not approoue the worshipping of them any other way, but addeth, We do not bow downe before them, as before the Dietie; he saith not quasi ad Dietatem, as to the Dietie, sed quasi ante, as before the Dietie. Thirdly, Cassander Cassand. Con­sult. d. Imag. De his Picturis quae fuerit mens, & sententia Rom. Ecclesiae ad­huc aetate Grego­rij satis ex eius Scriptis manifestum est, videlicet, ideò haberi Picturas, non quidem vt colantur & adorentur, sed vt imperiti Picturis inspiciendis, haud alitèr ac literis legendis, rerum gestarum admonerentur, & ad pietatem incitarentur. a learned Papist, confesseth inge­nuously, That Gregorie the Great forbad all worship of Images. But our latter Idolists vse no measure or modestie in eluding D and peruerting the euident sentences of the Fathers.

IESVIT.

Secondly, Polydore in this point is egregiously falsifi­ed; for he saieth not as the Minister makes him speake, E All Fathers condemned the worship of Jmages for feare of idolatry: but his words are, cultum Imaginum teste Hie­ronimo, omnes veteres Patres damnabant metu Idolo­latriae, All the old Fathers (as Hierom witnesseth) did [Page 249] condemne worship of Images for feare of idolatrie, by the A old Fathers, meaning the Fathers of the Old Testament, not of the New: which appeares, because in proofe of his saying, he brings not the testimonie of any Father of the New Testament, but onely of the Old, as of Moses, Da­uid, Ieremie, and other Prophets: and the scope of the whole Chapter is to declare, that the reason why, in the Old Testament, the Fathers misliked the worship of the Images of God, was, because they could not paint him aright, Cum B Deum nemo vidisset vnquam, because then no man had seene God. Afterwards God, saith Polidore, hauing ta­ken flesh, and being become visible to mortall eyes, men Illius faciem diuinae lucis fulgore, niten­tē haud dubiè con­templabātur, & [...], & [...] ef­figiem [...] infixam, aut pingere aut sculpe­re tunc primum [...] Polydor. d. Inuent. li. 7. ca. 13. flocked vnto him, and did without doubt behold and reue­rence his face, shining with the brightnesse of diuine light, and euen then they began to paint, or carue his Image al­readie imprinted in their minds: and those Images (saith he) they receiued with great worship and veneration, as C was reason, the honour of the Image redounding to the originall, as Basill writes. Which custome of adoring Ima­ges, the Fathers were so farre from reproouing, as they did not only admit therof, but also decreed and commanded the same by generall Councels, in the time of Iustinian the second, and Constantine his sonne. What man then is there so dissolute and audatious, as can dreame of the con­trarie, and doubt of the lawfulnesse of this worship, esta­blished so long agoe by the decree of most holy Fathers? D Thus writeth Polidore, and much more to the same pur­pose, in the verie place where the Minister citeth him to the contrarie; which shewes, how notoriously his credu­lous Readers are abused in matters of most moment: Basil. orat. in S. Bar­laam. Paulin. ep. ad [...]. Lactan. in carmine de Cruce. Tertul. de [...]. whence appeareth the third falshood, that in Gregories daies Images began to be set vp in Churches; which to haue beene in Churches long before, the testimonies of S. Basil, Paulinus, Lactantius, and Tertullian, doe sufficiently E [...].

ANSVVER. A

Polydores words are: Touching the beginning of Images, wee Polyder. d. Inuent. l. 6. c. 13. De simu­lachrorum origine, supra in secundo est à nobis libro proditum: Hic de illorum cultu iam [...], quem non modo nostrae religionis expertes, sed teste Hieronymo, omnes ferè veteres Sancti Patres, damnabant ob metum Idololatriae. haue treated before; now here we will speake of their worship, which not onely men of contrarie Religion, but (as Saint Hierom wit­nesseth) almost all the antient holy Fathers condemned, for feare of Idolatrie, &c.

d Crinitus. d. Hon. Disciplin. li. 9. c. 9. Girald. d. Dijs Gent. Syntagm. 1. Illud non praeter­mittam nos dico Christianos, vt aliquando Romanos, fuisse sinè imaginibus in primitiua quae vocatur Ecclesia. Origen. li. 8. c. Celsum. pa. 521. Simulachra Deo [...] sunt, non fabrorum opera, sed à verbo Dei dedolata D formataque in nobis, videlicet virtutes ad imitationem [...] totius creaturae, in quo sunt iustitiae, [...] fortitudinis, sapientiae, pietatis, caeterarumque [...] exempla. Clem. Alex. [...]. The Obiectour saith, That this place is falsified, and his rea­son B is, Polydore speaketh of the Fathers of the Old Testament, to wit, of Moses, Daniel, Ieremie, and the Prophets, and he saith, That they condemned worship of Images, because Christ was not as then incarnate, &c. But this is not all that Polydore speaketh, for among those Fathers, hee placeth Gregorie Polyd. ib. D. quoque Gregorius [...] Episcopū [...], &c. reprehendit, quod Imagines fregisset; & laudat quod coli inhibuisset. the Great, writing to Serenus. And although Christ was not made man in the dayes of the Prophets, yet he had appeared in the similitude of man Dan. 3. 25. Et quarti species simi­lis filio Dei. Orig. sup. Ioh. Hom. 6. & in 6. cap. Esa. hom. 1. Tertul. Adu. Iud. Text. 114. [...] E­pist. 13. ad Pulcher. Aug. c. Adimant. c. 9. Euseb. Hist. li. 1. c. 2. Niceph. Hist. li. 1. c. 2.3., and Abraham, Moses, Elias, and the Pro­phets being men, their Pictures might haue beene worshipped, C if Adoration of Images had beene lawfull. And besides Po­lydore, Cassander Cassand. Consult. d. Imag. Quantum veteres initio Ecclesiae ab omni Imaginum Adoratione abhorruerunt declarat vnus Origenes, &c. pag. 975., and many other Pontificians affirme that the antient Fathers in the Primatiue Church abhorred, or at least abstained from the hauing and worshipping of Images, which is also confirmed by their Testimonies.

IESVIT.

Neither can our Aduersarie bring any cleare Testimo­nie of Antiquitie against this custome. For the Decree of the councell of Eliberis, that no Picture should be made in the Church, least that which is worshipped or adored bee painted in walles, (which the Minister much vrgeth) E [...] White, in his Way. pag. 345. clearely signifieth the contrarie. For may not Images pain­ted on Tables, be in Churches, and yet neither made in the Church, nor painted on walls? which kinde of Images [Page 251] this Councell doth not forbid. And why doth the Councell A forbid Images to be made in the Church as pertinent to the fabrike thereof, or to be painted on walls, but out of reue­rence vnto Images? for they being holy things, and so to be honoured for their Prototypes sake, the Councell thought it vnworthy of their dignitie, they should bee made on walls, where they may easily be defaced, and deformed, and by persecutors (for that Councell was held in time of perse­cution) B abused.

ANSWER.

No testimonies can be so cleere, which Sophisters will not labour to peruert, and elude. Otherwise what is clearer against Image worship, than the words of the Councell of Elliberis and Epiphanius? It is lost labour to contest with men, Qui sola per­tinacia, pugnaces neruos, contra perspicuam veritatem intendunt (as Saint Augustine speaketh) which vpon sole pertinacie, bend their vttermost force to gainesay perspicous veritie. First, the Coun­cell C of Elliberis is so cleere against Image worship, that many Pontificians of great note, acknowledge the same, and therupon condemne, or eleuate the authoritie of that Councell. Canus. loc. li. 5. c. 4. [...] 1. Tom. Concil. Annot. in 36. Can. Concil. Elibert. Sixtus Se­nens. Bibl li. 5. An. 247. Baron. An. 57. n. 120 Andrad. Orthod. Explic. li. 9. Mendoza. Defens. Conc. Elib. li. 3. c. 5. & alij. Tapia. in [...]. Tho. q. 27. ar. [...]. pa. 341. Ad haec vero dico quod Concilium illud Elibertinum fuit prouinciale, & fortasé vidit populum suum decidentem in D Idololatriam occasione sumpta ex Imaginibus, & [...] illas statuit delendas. Bannes. sup. Tho. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. pa. 68. Bosius. li. 15. c. 16. pa. 270. Agobard. li. d. pict. & imag. recte nimirum ob huiusmodi euacuandam supersti­tionem ab orthodoxis patribus definitum est, picturas in Ecclesia fieri non debere, &c. Second­ly; If that Councell forbad the being of Images in Churches, then it did much more hold the worship of them to be vnlaw­full, but the beginning of the Canon apparently shewes that: Placuit in Ecclesijs picturas esse non debere, It [...] vs (of the Councell) that Pictures may not be in Churches.

IESVIT.

He doth also much insist vpon Epiphanius, but relates Iohn White in his Way. pag. 245. (according to his fashion) both his fact and words vnsin­cerely. Epiphanius (saith he) finding an Image painted on a cloath, hanging in a Church, rent it do wne, and said, it E was against the authority of the Scriptures, that any image should be in the Church. Thus he vnsincerely, as I said, not expressing what kind of Image that was, that Epiphanius [Page 252] in peeces: for Epiphanius saith: Cum iuuenissem A Imaginem hominis pendentem in Ecclesia tanquam Christi aut alicuius Sancti, nescio enim cuius erat: When I bad found an Image of a man hanging in the Church, as of Christ, or of some Saint, for I know not of whom the image was. Epiphanius doth by this relation more than insinuate that this was the Image of some pro­phane man, hanging in the Church, as if it had beene a sa­cred image of Christ, or some Saint: which is gathered by B this reason, When I saw (saith he) against the authoritie of Scriptures, the image of a man hanging in the Church; not absolutely any image, as M r. White citeth him, (for euen by Gods expresse command, Images were placed in the Temple) but the image of a man. Why doth Epiphanius so Exod. 25. & 3. 3. Reg. 6. much vrge the impietie of the fact, in regard that it was the image of a man? but that he vnderstood by the word Man, a meere ordinarie prophane man, not a blessed Saint. C For certainely it might seeme more against the authoritie of Scriptures, to make and set vp in Churches the image of God, than the image of holy men; and the image of Christ according to his Godhead, than as he is man: so that there was no cause, why Epiph. should put so much Emphasis in the word Man, had he not vnderstood a prophane man. For some Christians in those dayes being newly conuerted from Paganisme, and so reteyning some relikes thereof, did out of affection vnto their deceased friends and parents, vse to D paint their images, and offer vnto them oblations of Fran­kincense, and other the like heathenish honours, specially on their Anniuersary dayes vpon their Sepulchre. These men S. Augustine reprehends, and not the worshippers of Saints August. de [...] Ecclesiae. c. 36. Images, vnder the title of Sepulchrorum & picturarum Adoratores, who to the Ghosts of their parents defunct, did (though Christians) offer that heathenish worship which the Poet exhorteth vnto: E

Non pigeat tumulis animas excire paternis.
Paucaque in extructos mittere thura rogos.
Parua petunt manes —.

ANSVVER. A

This place of Epiphanius is a thorne in the Papists sides, and they are so distracted about the clearing of it, that Vasques Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 5. c. 3. n. 137. In tanta va­rietate Catholici constituti sunt, vt molestum videa­tur, quid vnus­quisque sentiat re­censere. saith, It is an irkesome thing, to report, what each of them hath spo­ken. Some of them reiect the Epistle, saying, that it was a coun­terfeit Alan. Copus. Dial. 5. c. 21. San. d. [...]. l. 2. c. 4. Bel. d. Im c. 9. Sua. [...]. [...]. 1. dis. 54. sect. 1. Canis. d. Deip. vir. li. 5. c. 22. worke. But this opinion is reprooued, and confuted, by the learned of their owne part Vasq. ib. n. 40. Mihi vero minus haec responsio pla­cer, arque in pri­mis [...] Episto­lam Epiphanij es­se, etiamsi nun cgraecum illius exemplar non inueniatur, in dubitatum esse debet, Tapia in 3. p. Tho. q. 27. ar. 8. pa. 341.; and what can be more im­probable, than that Saint Hierome would translate a counterfeit worke? Others say that Epiphanius did this in a preposterous zeale Tho. Waldens. [...]. 3. tit. 19. ca. 157. n. 7. Forsan zelo captus erat, non secundum scientiam, &c. Puiol. d. Ador. disp. 3. sect. 1. pa. 200.. Ferdinandus Velosillus Velos. Aduert. in 2. [...]. Aug. q. 9. Epiphanius haer. Collirid. Statuas & imagi­nes C humanas earumque adorationem, acriter insectatur, quas & in Episto la ad Iohannem Hierosolymitanum iterum dente canino mordet, hic autem forsan ignorantia excusatur, eo quod contra Idololatras [...] & ideohaereticis non anmumeratur. or Velosius (as Posseuine calleth B him) saith as followeth: Epiphanius, against the Colliridian hae­resie, inueigheth bitterly against Statues and Images of men, and against their worship. And againe, in his Epistle to Iohn Bi­shop of Hierusalem, he taunteth them currishly or despitefully ( dente canino mordet) perhaps this man is excuseable, by reason of ignorance, and because he wrot against Idolaters, wherefore he is not ranked among Haeretikes.

Others affirme Sixtus. Senen. Bibl. li. 5. Annot. 247., that Epiphanius did this, because of the abuse of superstitious people, committed about that Picture. Others say Alphons. Castro. Adu. [...]. li. 8. ver. Imago. he did thus, because the contrarie was not as then defined by the Church. But Vasques Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 5. c. 4. himselfe, and before him Mari­anus Victorius Victor. Schol. sup. Hierom. insist vpon this poore shift, which our Aduersa­rie followeth in this place, to wit, that this vale or curtaine, D which Epiphanius defaced, and rent asunder, contayned an Image, or Picture, of some prophane man, hanging in the Church, as if it had beene a sacred image of Christ, or of some Saint, and which was worshipped by some Christians newly conuerted from Paganisme, with heathenish honours. But if this glosse had beene likely, it is very improbable, that Cardi­nall Bellarmine Bel. d. Imag. c. 9., and some other Puiol d. Ador. disp. 3. sect. 1. Tapia in 3. p. Tho. q. 27. ar. 8. pa. 341. also, who haue written since Vasques, would haue esteemed it so lightly. And Epiphanius his text Epist. Epiphan. apud Hieron. to. 3. E Audiui quosdam murmurare contra me: quia quando simul pergebamus ad Sanctum locum qui vocatur Be­thel, [...] collectam tècum ex more Ecclesiastico facerem, & [...] ad villam quae dicitur Anablatha, vi­dissemque ibi preteriens lucernam ardentem, & interrogassem quis locus esset, [...] esse Ecclesiam, & intrassem vt orarem, inueni ibi velum pendens in foribus eiusdem Ecclesiae tinctum [...] depictum, & ha­bens imaginem quasi Christi, vel sancti cuiusdam, non enim satis [...] cuius imago fuerit, Cum ergo hoc [...] in Ecclesia Christi contra authoritatem Scripturarum [...] pendere [...], scidi illud, & ma­gis dedi [...] custodibus eiusdem loci, vt [...] mortuum [...] obvoluerent & efferrent, Ib. Et deinceps, praecipere in Ecclesia Christi, istiusmodi vela quae contra religionem nostram veniunt, non appendi. will not beare this exposition: For he saith that at the [Page 254] time when he wrote that Epistle, he did not remember (to wit, A perfectly) whose image this was: but if Epiphanius himselfe did not remember whose image it was, whether of Christ, or of a Saint, or of some other man, how knowes this Iesuit, that it was the image of a prophane person? Besides, if it had beene the picture of some prophane person or Pagan superstitiously [...] [...] [...] or [...] translated by [...] ad verbum, quasi, is to be [...], not by a note of compati­son, but of [...], or guessing, in things wee [...] not perfectly re­member or know; as, vidi [...] quasi [...]: or I saw a troupe of horse, put case 100. worshipped, wherefore was Epiphanius silent, in relating here­of, considering that the bare narration of so grosse a fact, would most apparently haue iustified the whole proceeding? but he af­firmeth only in defence of his action, That entring into an Ora­torie, and there espying a vaile or hanging, whereon was figu­red B the image of a man, which he did not (when he wrote the Epistle) remember whether it were Christ his picture, or any other (of the Saints,) he cut the same in peeces, and withall commanded, that no such painted vayles should hereafter be suffered to hang in the Church.

IESVIT.

Wherefore seeing this Minister, so much esteemed in the Church of England, saying what he can deuise in proofe of C the Romane Churches change about Images, brings nothing but manifest falshoods, so many in so few lines; any indif­ferent man may conclude, that worship of Images hath continued without change euer since the Apostles. For if any change in such matter as this had beene made, it would haue beene most euident, when, and by whom so great a No­ueltie was introduced.

ANSVVER. D

The Minister whom you depraue, was no otherwise esteemed in the Church of England than [...] an ordinarie Student, and professour of Theologie, neither was his authoritie in handling of controuersies greater than the waight of his argument and disputation should deserue. And your Hyperbole, saying, That [...]. [...]. li. 2. Ne [...] Stomachi [...] indigesta ma­ledictorum [...]. he bringeth nothing, but manifest falshoods, is rather an vndi­gested cruditie of rayling words, than a true censure of him, against whom you are better able to declame, then dispute.

But your threadbare argument, whereby you labour to E prooue, That worship of Images hath continued without change, euer since the Apostles, because it would haue beene most euident, when, and by whom, so great a noueltie was in­troduced, hath at the least three lame feet.

[Page 255] First, The Antecedent is false, for it is euident to iudicious A men, when, and by whom this noueltie was brought in; as for those which are blinded with superstition, and haue a feared conscience, nothing is euident to such Theoph. [...]. lib. 1. ad Auto­lic. Omnibus quidem sunt oculi, at quotundam adeo sunt obscurati, vt solis lucem intueri nequeunt, caeterum non propterea solares radij fulgore carent, quod [...] caeteris non videntur. Imo [...] & suos oculos potius culpent. [...]. Serm. 2. d. Resur. Quam difficile est accedere ad cor eius, quod lapidea quaedam obsti­natio & impudentia clausit. Seneca Epist. 15. Haupastes vxoris [...] fatua vetula subito desijt videre, in­credibilem tibi narro rem sed veram, nescit se esse caecam, subinde ducem suam rogat, vt foras exeat, ait [...] tenebrosam esse..

Secondly, This Argument presupposeth, that Worship of B Images was generally practised among Christians, in the dayes of the Apostles, and in the Primatiue Church; for otherwise, why shall Protestants be bound explicitely to assigne the time of Alteration? If this practise was not Apostolicall and Pri­matiue, the succeeding practise, whensoeuer it began, and whe­ther we can assigne or not assigne, when and by whom, maketh not the same lawfull.

Thirdly, Ab ignoratione rei ad negationem non sequitur: It is inconsequent to argue, Protestants cannot out of humane Hi­storie C assigne the moment of time when worship of Images first began to be practised in the Church, Ergo, This practise is not an Innouation. For Papists cannot assigne the moment of time when Heathens first began to worship Baal and Ashtaroth, or when the Progenitors of Abraham began to serue other Gods, Iosh. 24. 2. And yet they will iudge the consequence to be ab­surd, which should inferre, because Papists cannot assigne, when and by whom such Innouations began, therefore they were perpetuall. Wee expect diuine Reuelation to warrant Ado­ration of Images, for vnlesse that appeare, the same cannot bee D a necessarie dutie in Religion. But the Iesuit would ambush himselfe in the Laborinth of Historicall Discourse, which can produce onely humane beleefe [...]. d. [...]. l. 2. c. 25. Quod Hi­storici [...] [...], non potest [...] humanā cui [...]., when it is plaine and certaine, but being also vncertaine and not faithfully kept, it may per­plex and deceiue, and beget contention, whereas on the con­trarie, Diuine Reuelation settles the conscience, and makes the Truth manifest.

IESVIT. §. 3. E

The places of Exodus and Deuteronomie, with no probabilitie vrged against the worship of Images, by Pro­testants that make them.

[Page 256] Against Image worship, Protestants bring in the place A of Exodus, Chap. 20. ver. 4. & 5. and of Deuteron. cap. 5. ver. 6. & 7. Thou shalt not haue false gods before me, Thou shalt not make to thy selfe a grauen Jmage, nor any likenesse, either in the heauen aboue, or on the earth be­low, or of things that are vnder waters, or vnder ground: Thou shalt not adore, nor worship them. Which place I wonder they can thinke strong enough to ouerthrow a Cu­stome, in which the rules of Nature, the principles of Chri­stianitie, B the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church, doth settle Christians; for this place makes against them, or not against vs, which I prooue thus: The Images we are for­bidden to worship, we are forbidden to make; Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Jmage, thou shalt not a­dore them, nor worship them. Contrariwise, The Jmages we may lawfully make, we may also lawfully adore or wor­ship, if they be Images of venerable and adorable persons. C But the Images which we worship of Christ, Protestants make, yea some, to wit, Lutherans, set them vp in their Churches, and they are Images of an adoreable person: Ergo, They cannot condemne our Adoration of Jmages, except likewise they condemne their making them, as against Gods Law.

ANSVVER.

The places of Scripture alleaged by Protestants, against A­doration D of Images, Exod. 20. 5. Deut. 5.8. are a part of the Morall Law [...]. li. 4. c. 28. Nam Deus primo quidem per natu­ralia [...]. quae [...] initio infixa. de­dit [...], [...], id est per Decalogum, (quae si quis non fecerit, non habeat salutem) & nihil plus ab eis [...] Jbid. c. [...]. Decalogi quidem verba, ipse per semetipsum omnibus fimiliter Dominus [...] est. Et ideo [...] permanent apud nos, extensionem & augmentum, sed non dissolutionem accipientia, per carnalem eius aduentum. August. c. Faust. Manich. l. 19. c. 18. & l. 3. c. 2. Epist. Pelag. ca. 4. Tho. Aquin. 12. q. 100. ar. 1. Schola­stici. in 3. sent. Dist. 37. Suarez. d. Relig. li. 2. c. 1. Caetera praecepta Decalogi, purè moralia sunt. Tertium vero (de Sabbatho) partim morale, partim ceremoniale fuit. [...]. [...]. 22, q. 122. [...]. 4. ad. 1. Caietan. ibid. Alex. Hal. E p. 3. q. 32. m. 2. Et omnes Scholastici & summistae.: therefore if the worshipping of Images was prohibited vnto the Israelites in the same, it is also forbidden Christians, and to worship Images is vnlawfull in the state of the New Testament.

The Aduersarie wondreth, why Protestants should thinke, that the [...] places of Exodus and [...], are strong enough to ouerthrow Image Worship, being [...] vpon [...] of Nature, Christianitie, and Tradition.

[Page 257] First, This latter Clause is onely a vaine ostentation, and re­petition A of that which is formerly confuted.

Secondly, The reason whereupon he groundeth his confi­dent speech, saying, Which place I wonder they can thinke strong enough, is wonderous weake, as it will appeare by the Resolu­tion, and Answer of his Obiection.

This Argument in forme is,

If all worship of Images is prohibited, Exod. 20. &c. then all making them is also prohibited: for the same Precept, which B saith, Thou shalt not bow downe to them, nor worship them, saith in the former part, Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image, &c.

But all making of Images is not prohibited, Exod. 20. Be­cause Protestants themselues allow some kinde of Image ma­king, Ergo,

All worship of Images is not prohibited or condemned, Exod. 20, &c. but some kind onely.

Passing by the Assumption, Protestants denie the conse­quence C of the first Proposition; and to the Proofe thereof, they say, That although some kind and manner of making I­mages, is forbidden by the Commandement, to wit, such as is intended and prepared for worship: yet all making of Pi­ctures or Images, to wit, for Historie and Ornament, is not pro­hibited. But our Aduersarie opposeth this Answer, saying:

IESVIT.

If they answere, That we are not absolutely forbidden to make them, but onely not to make them with purpose D and intention to adore them, they discouer much partialitie, and not so much reuerence to Gods expresse Word as they pretend; for the words of Gods Law, are as cleare and expresse against making of Jmages, as against worshipping them, Thou shalt not make them, thou shalt not adore them. If then Protestants, to excuse their Custome of making of Images, may to Gods expresse word, Thou shalt not make them, adde (by way of explication) with purpose and in­tention E to adore them; why may not Catholickes, to defend from note of impietie a continued Christian Custome, to Gods word Thou shalt not adore any Jmage, adde (by way [Page 258] of explication) as God, or with diuine worship, resting in A it? How can they truely boast they bring Gods cleere word for themselues, and against vs, which is no [...] cleere and expresse against their Image-making, than against our Jmage-worship? If the place be difficill, why build they their Faith vpon it against vs? If it be cleere, why be they forced in their owne defence, to depart from the expresse Text?

ANSWER. B

The summe of this disputation reduced to forme, is as fol­loweth.

If to Gods expresse word, Thou shalt make vnto thy selfe no grauen Image, &c. we may adde (by way of explication) Thou shalt make no Image, with intention to worship: Then, to Gods expresse word, Thou shalt not bow downe to them, nor worship them, we may also adde (by way of explication) C Thou shalt not bow downe to them, nor worship them as God, or as Gods proper Image, or with diuine worship, resting in the Image; for the word of God is as cleere and expresse against making of Images, as against worshipping of them.

But Protestants affirme the former, and they expound the first branch of the Commandement, saying, that the sence of it is, Thou shalt make no Image with intent to worship it, Ergo,

To Gods expresse word, Thou shalt not bow downe, &c. we may adde (by way of explication) Thou shalt not bow downe to worship them, as God, or with diuine honour D resting in the thing. And if Protestants denie the latter, they are partiall in affirming the former.

The consequence of the Proposition is againe denied: For although we may expound the former part of the Comman­dement with this Explication, With intent to worship; yet we may not expound the latter part by saying, Thou shalt not bow downe, &c. that is, although thou maiest worship some Images, according to some maner of worship, yet thou maiest not wor­ship E vnlawfull Images, expressing the verie Deitie, nor any Image, by resting finally and absolutely in them. And the rea­sons whereupon we ground our deniall of the Consequence, are these.

First, Moses himselfe repeating the law concerning Images, [Page 259] saith, Yee shall make you no Idoll [...] Oleast. sup. Exod. 20. Non faci­as tibi sculptile, id est, Imaginem alicuius rei, neque omnem similitudinem, qualiscunquè illa sit, siue Imago, siue similitudo imper­fecta. [...], sup. Exod. 20. Chaldeus pro sculptili Imaginem legit [...]. Ferus, sup. Exod. 20. Primò tam sculpti­lia prohibet, quam similitudines, hoc est tam sculpta, quam picta. Deindè Idola vel similitudines, quarumcunquè rerum prohibet fieri vt colantur. The old Translat. Deut. 4. 16. Sculptam similitudinem aut Imaginem. Iustin. Mart. in Tryph. pag. 25. Deus per Mosen sanxit ne qua Imago seu similitudo fiat [...]., nor [...] Image, &c. A [...], to bow downe vnto it, Leuit. 26.1.

Secondly, the brasen Serpent, and the Cherubins, were law­fully made euen by Gods appointment, in the old Testament, and yet their worship was vnlawfull, 2. Reg. 18, 4. And some of B the best learned Papists Vasq. d. Ador. lib. 2. disp. 4. ca. 6. n. 98. Read before pa. 213. Carol. Mag. c. Imag. lib. 1. ca. 19. Nequè tabulae, nequè duo Cherubim, nec caetera [...] ad adorandum in veteri testamento facta fuisse creduntur: quid [...] aliud faciunt, nisi vt Imagines exaltent, Christianorum res extenuent? Cum videlicet, Tabulae, & duo Cherubim, exemplaria fuerint futurorum, & cum duo Iudei ha­buerint carnalitèr, resquè typicis opertae figuris praefigurationes figurarum fuerint futurorum, nos habemus in veritate spiritualitèr. acknowledge, that the Cherubins might not be worshipped.

Thirdly, Iesuit Vasques Vasq. d. Ado­rat. lib. 2. disp. 4. c. 6. n. 98. Resp. Lege ve­teri non fuisse veti­tam omnem simili­tudinem aut effigi­em quomodocun­què, sed omné cul­tum, & adoratio­nem ipsius, atquè adeo omnem quo­què Imaginem seu effigiem modo ac­commodato adora­tioni, erectam aut constitutam: qua­re nec Cherubinis, nec alijs figuris in Templo factis ali­quem cultum fuisse delatum. saith, That in the old Law, euerie similitude or pourtraiture was not forbidden to be made, but all worship and adoration of Images, and all making of an C Image, or pourtraiture, appointed or accommodated to wor­ship, was forbidden. Yea besides Tertullian Tertul. c. Marc. lib. 2. cap. 22. Proindè & similitudinem vetans fieri omni­um quae in Coelo & in terra & in aquis ostendit, & causas Idololatriae, [...], substantiam cohibentes subijcit enim non adorabitis ea nequè seruietis illis. Sic & Cherubin & Seraphim aurea in [...] figuratum exemplum certè simplex ornamentum, accommodata suggestui, longe diuersas habendo causas ab Idololatriae conditione, ob quam similitudo prohibetur, non videntur similitudinum prohibitarum legi refragari non in eo similitudi­nis statu deprehensa, ob quem similitudo prohibetur. and Damascen Damasc. Orat. 1. d. Imag. Vides quomodò vitandi fimulachrorum cultus gratia Imagines fieri vetat?, the greatest number of Papals expound the first part of the second Commandement by the latter branch, to wit, Gerson, Gers. Compend. Theol. d. 10. praecept. Prohibentur fieri ad hunc, videlicet, finem vt adorentur, & colantur., Ferus Ferus sup. Exod. 20. Quod hic dicitur de non facien­dis quibuscunquè Imaginibus intelligi debet ad adorandum ea, vt in Leuitico expresse ponitur., Caietan Caietan. sup. Exod. 20., Alphonsus Castro Alphons. Castr. c. Haer. lib. 8. verb. Imago. Non vt non habeantur, aut fiant absolutè, sed vt E non fiant ad colendum ea., Oleaster Oleast. sup. Exod. 20. Vt non fiat sculptile aut Imago, scilicet, ad cultum., Ystella Ystell. sup. Exod. 20. v. 7., Turre­cremat Turrecremat. sup. Decret. d. Consecrat. Dist. 3. ca. perlatum. Non prohibe­tur illo praecepto, facere quamcunquè sculpturam, vel similitudinem, sed facere ad adorandum, and Aquinas Aquin. 3. p. q. 25. ar. 3. Ad. 1. himselfe hath these words, Non pro­hibetur illo praecepto, Exod. 20. facere quamcunque sculpturam, vel similitudinem, sed facere ad adorandum, It is not forbidden in that precept, Exod. 20. to make any grauen Image, or similitude; D but, to make the same to worship it.

And from the former I inferre, That although some Pi­ctures and Images may be made, yet none of them may be [Page 260] worshipped, and therefore we are compelled to expound the A first words of the second Commandement, with limitation, to wit, Thou shalt make vnto thy selfe no Image, with an intent to wor­ship it: but on the contrarie, we may not expound the second clause of the Commandement, by adding the Iesuits Expositi­on, which is, Thou shalt not bow downe to them, or worship them as God, or with diuine worship resting in the Image.

The first clause of the Commandement, Thou shalt make no grauen Image, admits an explication and qualification, as it is ap­parant by the brasen Serpent, and by the Cherubins Tertul. c. Marc. li. 2. ca. 22. Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 4. c. 6. n. 99. Quo loco non docet Tertullianus, vt falso Pamelius putauit, in vereri lege solum esse prohibitum similitudines & effigies pro Dijs adorari., and by the confession of learned Papists Ferus sup. Exod. 20. Non iustifico abusus, sed hoc tantum volo, quod Ecclesia filijs suis ob occulos ponens Imagines Christi, & Sanctorum non facit contrà hoc praeceptum: non enim ideo ea proponit vt colantur, sed vt admoneant & doce­ant, admoneant doctos, doceant indoctos.. If our Aduersaries giue B instance in the Arke of the Testament, saying that the same was adored: I answer two things:

First, there is a difference betweene the Arke and Images, because God was present by an extraordinarie Grace, vnto the Arke, according to a couenant made with the Israelites, Exod. 25. 22. whereas there is no such promise or couenant C concerning Images.

Secondly, the Israelites did not adore the materiall Arke, but they worshipped God himselfe before the Arke, and that by a speciall commandement, 1. Sam. 1.19. Psal. 99.5. But that the second clause of the Commandement admits a qualificati­on, cannot be prooued by any testimonie or example of holy Scripture: yea the contrarie is manifest, and learned Papists Anton. Perez. Laurea Salmantic. d. Imag. Vsu. Nec iterum valet dicere cum Card. Bellar­mino, praeceptum Exodi non prohi­bere omnem om­nino [...] hoc est Imaginem, sed duntaxat illam quae pro Deo alie­no extruitur, &c. Quoniam vt habet communis scholasticorum sententia, & antiquorum statutum & [...] verbum, omnium lmaginum vsus fuit veteri lege sublatus, &c. Respondet. Ib. ca. 6. Omnis similitudinis species veteri lege fuit sublata, quae adorationi videbatur accommodata. Vellosil. Aduert. in 2. To. Aug. q. 9. affirme, That although some kind of Images might be made in the old Testament, yet no Images formed by humane inuen­tion might be adored, as I haue formerly shewed out of Aqui­nas, D and others, pag. 209. And consequently the Iesuits speech is false, when he affirmeth, The word of God is as cleere and expresse against making of Images, as against worshipping them.

IESVIT.

Secondly, their exposition is not onely violent against E the Text, but also incongruous against the sence; for Gods prohibition of a thing, doth also forbid the intention thereof. In the precept, Thou shalt not kill, the inten­tion [Page 261] of murther is sufficiently forbidden; so that he who A makes a sword with purpose to murther his enemie, sinnes against the Precept, Thou shalt not kill: wherefore if Gods Precept had beene thus, Thou shalt not weare about thee any weapon, Thou shalt not kill, the prohi­bition of wearing weapons should haue beene absolute, and not onely with purpose of murther. In like manner, Gods Precept, Thou shalt not adore Images, doth sufficiently forbid intention to adore them, and so consequently forbids B the making of Images, with such an intention; so that if not to make Jmages, be nothing else than not to haue pur­pose to adore them, a whole long sentence in the [...] is superfluous, and without any speciall sence, which is scarcely credible.

ANSWER.

This Argument reduced to forme, soundeth as followeth: C

If Gods prohibition of a thing doth also forbid the intenti­on thereof, then it had beene sufficient for him to haue said, Thou shalt not adore Images: and the former clause, Thou shalt make no grauen Image, &c. forbidding onely the ma­king of Images, with an intention to worship, had beene super­fluous, and without any speciall sence.

But God held it not sufficient to say, Thou shalt not adore Images: and the former clause, Thou shalt make no Image, is not superfluous, &c. Ergo

The former clause of the Commandement, which saith, Thou D shalt make no grauen Image, forbiddeth not the making of Images, with an intention to worship. And from hence it ap­peareth, that the Protestants exposition of the second Commandement, is not onely violent but incongruous.

I answer, granting the antecedent part of the first Propositi­on; (for whensoeuer God forbiddeth any action, he alwaies prohibiteth, at least implicitely, & interpretatiuely, the purpose and intention of doing the same.) But from hence it followeth E not, that because the worship of Images is prohibited in the words, Thou shalt not bow downe to them, &c. therefore it was vn­necessarie and superfluous, to say, Thou shalt make no Images, with intention to worship. First, touching such vices as man by nature and custome is prone vnto, Abundans cautela non nocet, [Page 262] abundant warning and caution is not superfluous. Secondly, A we haue examples in the verie Decalogue, that although inor­dinate concupiscence was prohibited in the seuenth and eight Commandement, Thou shalt not commit adulterie, Thou shalt not steale: yet the intention, and sensuall motion and desire to do this, is prohibited also in the tenth Precept August. sup. Ex­od. q. 71. Quaeritur quid disterat quod dictum est, non maechaberis, ab eo quod paulo post dictum est, non concupisces, &c. In eo quippe quod dictum est, non maechaberis pote­rat & illud intelligi: nisi sorsan in illis duobus praeceptis, non maechandi & non furandi, ipsa opera notata sunt: in hijs vero extremis ipsa concupiscentia, &c.. Thirdly, we say not in our answer, That the intention of adoring the Image, being made, is forbidden in these words of the Commande­ment, Thou shalt make vnto thy selfe no grauen Image, &c. as these words are considered apart, that is, diuiding, and parting the B said words from those which follow, Thou shalt not [...] downe to them, nor worship them: But we conioyne the former and latter words Aug. sup. Ioh. tr. 111. Nemo serenissimum sensum, nubi. Iosa contradictione perturbet, consequentia perhibeant testimonium, precedentibus verbis., and make the one materiall, and the other formall, and expound them in this sort; Thou shalt make vnto thy selfe no grauen Image, intending to vse the same contrarie to the words of the Law following, which prohibite the Adoration of all created and artificiall formes.

When our Sauiour in the Gospell, forbiddeth to looke on C a woman to lust after her, Matth. 5.28. We may not diuide the first and latter part: for the looking on a woman without lust, is onely materiall in the Action, and it may be lawfull, and in some case vertuous, Ioh. 19.26. Luk. 7.44. But we must con­ioyne the Intention, which is formall, to the materiall aspect, and then the same is vicious, Iob 31.1. Genes. 38.15. And there is nothing more common in the holy Scripture, than for the former part of a Doctrine, or Commandement, to be expoun­ded, limited, and receiue his kinde from the latter part, Mark. D 10.11. Luk. 16.18. Psal. 37.21. Iob 31.26, 27. Esay 5.8, 11. Luk. 14.12, 13.

If it be obiected, that there is a sof Pasuch, or full point at the end of the Sentence, which forbiddeth the making of Ima­ges: I answer, First, That in the place of Leuiticus, Cap. 26.1. There is no such period or full point. Secondly, Because the making of some kind of Images, to wit, visible Images, and representations of God, according to his Deitie Abulens. sup. Deuteronom. ca. 4. q. 5. Quaedam sunt, quae nec in Statua, nec in figura con­grue assignari possunt, sicut Trinitas beata, quae nullis cerporeis [...] circumscripta est. [...]. sup. Deuteronom. q. 1. Haec dicit instruens eos, ne simulachrum [...] fabricent, neque tentent vnquam diumam Imaginem effingere. Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 1. pag. 165. Origen. c. Celsum. li. 7. Euseb. d. praepar. Euang. l. 1. c. 6. Vasq. d. Ador. l. 2. Disp. 4. c. 2. Ex Deuteronomij quarto, clare deducitur, non [...] verum Deum in aliqua imagine venerari., Deut. 4. 16. is vnlawfull in it selfe, secluding Adoration, therefore the Spirit of God forbade both the making of Images, to wit, of E [Page 263] false Gods, and of the true God, in manner aforesaid; and also A in the other Branch of the Commandement, hee forbad wor­ship and adoration of all Images whatsoeuer, deuised by man.

IESVIT.

Besides, as to make an Image to adore, is Idolatrie; so likewise to take it in hand, or looke on it to that purpose. Why then was not such looking on, or touching, with pur­pose of Adoration, expressely forbidden, as well as making? Or if looking on them, with intention to adore them, be so B included in the Precept, Thou shalt not adore, as there needs not that expression; What need was there, that ma­king of Images, with purpose of Adoration, should be so largely and particularly expressed? Wherefore, whosoeuer is a Religious follower of Gods pure Word, must either without explication, condemne the making of Images, toge­ther with their worship, or else allow the worship of the Jmages (if their Prototypes be adorable) the making C whereof he approoues.

ANSVVER.

Although to take in hand, or to behold an Image, or [...] signe, naturall or artificiall, with intent to worship it, be [...], Iob. 31. 26. yet as God Almightie in other Commande­ments doth not alwayes literally and expressely set downe e­uerie particular action of sinne, virtually and [...] con­demned in the same Tortul. d. Idol. c. 9. Cum magia pu­nitur, [...] species est Astrologia, vti (que) & species in [...]. Cap. 11. [...] interdi­ctio, ostendit mihi, lanistam quo (que) ab Ecclesia [...]., but deliuereth sufficient grounds, from D whence the vnlawfulnesse thereof may appeare; and also in the Prophets, and other diuine Scriptures, declareth his owne will more fully, Matth. 5. 21, 28. So likewise, in this Commande­ment, concerning Images, the vnlawfulnesse of handling, behol­ding, and the like, are prohibited virtually and interprevatiuely; [...] in one of the Clauses of the Commandement, but in both Clauses conioyned, as aforesaid.

As for the Iesuits Interrogations, Why then &c. What need was there &c. wee referre him to the Law-maker, to challenge E or demand reasons of him: And as for our selues, we rest vp­on the reuealed will of God Clem. Alex­andr. [...]. Qui [...] verbo veritatis, operantur aliquid, vel loquuntur, sunt similes eis, qui conantur ingredi absque pedious., not daring to question or de­mand reasons of his actions.

IESVIT. A

Hence I gather, That the most naturall and truest Ex­position of that Precept is, that it forbids not onely the wor­ship, but also the making of any grauen Image. But how? To represent God according to his Diuine substance. This sense is gathered out of the words precedent, Thou shalt not haue strange Gods before me, which is explicated B in the consequent verse, Thou shalt not make to thy selfe a grauen Image: For he that makes to himselfe the Jmage of any thing, as apt to represent God according to his Diuine substance, and to conuey our imaginations directly to him, doth make and hath false Gods; because the true God is not imaginable, nor is truly apprehended by imagi­nation, conformable vnto any Image.

ANSWER. C

That is not the most naturall and truest Exposition of the Commandement, which deliuereth onely a part, and not the whole and entire sense. But this Exposition of the Iesuit deli­uereth onely a part, and not the whole sense. For our Aduersa­ries themselues confesse, That the placing of Images of false Gods, and of prophane persons, in Oratories and Temples, or of any other persons Epiphan. Epist. reade before., which are not worthie Cabrer. in 3. p. Thom. q. 25. Ar. 2. Disp. 1. [...] aliquid adoratur cultu religioso Deo vel sanctis [...], quod tali [...] est. to be wor­shipped with that honour, is vnlawfull; and I suppose they D will not denie, that the forming of the Images of Angels and Saints, with intent that they should be worshipped with [...] honour, either absolute or respectiue, is vnlawfull, and consequently, prohibited by this Commandement. For al­though the Adoration of created or artificiall things is prohi­bited in the first Commandement, Thou shalt haue no other Gods but me; yet the forming and erecting Images of any kind to be the outward meanes of such Idolatrous worship, is prohibited in this Commandement, Thou shalt not make vnto thy selfe any grauen Image, &c. Leuit. 26.1. And thus Tertullian Tertul. d. Idol. c. 5. & 6., Clemens E Alexandrinus Clem. Alex­andrinus, Adm. ad Gent., and many other Fathers Procop. [...]. Exod. 20. [...]. d. Pict. & Imag., expound the Com­mandement.

IESVIT. A

Wherefore the pictures of the Holy Ghost, in forme of a Doue; and of God the Father, in forme of an old man, be not direct and proper Images of the two diuine persons; but onely of the Doue that descended on Christ, and of the old man seene in a vision by Daniell, in which the perfe­ctions of these persons are not liuely represented, but a farre off, and imperfectly shadowed, nor doe Catholiques vse B them as proper Images standing for their Prototypes, and conueying our actions by imagination vnto them. For no Catholike doth kisse the feet of the Doue, or lye prostrate at them, referring by imagination that outward subiection to the feet of the Holy Ghost, who hath no feet, but meta­phoricall, not imaginable, nor such as can be represented by image.

ANSWER. C

You slubber ouer the matter of Images, of the persons of the Trinitie, which are vsed in the Roman Church (as experience witnesseth, and your owne Doctours Sua. in 3. p. Th. to. 1. dis. 54. sect. 2. Nunquam Roma­na Eccles. &c. Cab. in 3. q. 25. dis. 1. n. 80. Puiol. d. Ado. Disp. 3. Sec. 4. Con­stat quod haec con­suetudo depingedi Angelos & Deum, modo sub specie Columbae, modo sub figura Trinita­tis sit vbique inter Catholicos recep­ta imo 7. Synod. Act. 5. Spiritus Sancti Imaginem sub specie colum­bae, [...] sub figu­ra Trinitatis ap­probat, & Concili­um Tridentinum. Sess. 25. admittit Imagines Dei in picturis, precipuè Historiarum. acknowledge) and you conceale part of your Popish doctrine. For although you af­firme, that these Images are not proper, but metaphoricall re­presentations of the diuine persons: yet you hold, that these represent, not onely the effects and operations of the said per­sons, but also God himselfe; and you teach also, that they are to be Gandau. Quodl. 10. q. 6. Tertio mo­do adorari potuit latria Columba, in qua [...] Spiritus Sanctus. Puiol. d. Adoratione. Disp. 3. Sect. 4. Quamuis verum sit, [...] figuras corporales, sub quibus Deus apparebat, [...] illi Hypostaticè vni­tas, tamen reuera Deus, sub illis figuris apparuit, & sub illis operatus est aliqua beneficia: vnde Imago repre­sentans E figuram sub qua Deus apparuit, non solum est imago effectus Dei, sed ipsius Dei, non secundum se, sed vt & operantis, & conferentis nobis aliquod beneficium, atque adeo tales Imagines venerandae sunt. worshipped as sacred signes; metaphorically shadowing D and representing, the persons whereunto they haue relation: and the opinion of Durand. 3. d. 9. q. 2. n. 15. Nihil factum per modum Imaginis ad representandum Diu. personas non incarnatas, est adorandum. Fatuum est (tales) Imagines facere vel eas venerari. Durand and Abulensis Abul. Deut 4. q. 5. Quaedam sunt quae nec in statua nec in figura congruè assignari [...], sicut Trinitas beata, &c. holding the con­trarie, is condemned by the common sentence of later Pontifi­cians, among which Caietan [...]. in 3. p. Tho. q. 25. ar. 3. Haec nonsolum pinguntur vt ostendantur, sicut Cherubin olim in templo, sed vt adorentur. saith, Images of the Trinitie are painted (in the Roman Church, not onely that they may be shewed, or looked on) as the Cherubins of old time were in the temple, but that they may be adored. Therefore if Romish Catholikes doe not kisse [Page 266] them, or lye prostrate before them (as our Iesuit affirmeth) they A obserue not the ordinance of their Church, as the same is rela­ted by the renowned Cardinall Caietan,

IESVIT.

Wherfore this Text being thus cleerely explicable, and being not explicated at all, doth make no lesse against Pro­testants than vs: I see no reason why they should bee so much out of loue with the worship of the image of Christ Iesus their Lord, to which Nature and Christianitie binds B them.

ANSVVER.

The summe of this part of your disputation is, That in the text of Exodus, To fall downe and worship images, is no more forbidden than to make: but making of images is not simply and absolutely vnlawfull; and consequently their worship is not simply and absolutely vnlawfull.

The first ground and proposition of this argument is false: C for worshipping of images is forbidden, as the principall obiect of that negatiue precept, and as a thing morally euill in his ve­ry kind: but making them is forbidden (onely) when it is a meanes subseruient to worship: and because it may be separa­ted, both in his owne nature, and in mans intention, from that end and vse, therefore the one is simply forbidden, and the other is onely prohibited, when it becommeth a meanes or in­strument to the other. And this distinction and disparitie be­tweene making and worshipping, hath beene confirmed by the example of the brasen Serpent: for when the same was onely D made, and looked vpon, it was a medicine; when it was wor­shipped, it became a poyson. 2 Kings 18.4. Wherefore, consi­dering that the holy Scripture approoueth the difference which Protestants assigne, betweene making and worshipping of images, I see no reason why Papists should not rest vpon the sentence of holy Scripture, alwayes condemning, but ne­uer maintaining Image worship; rather than to persist in a pal­pable superstition, to the offence of God, and scandall of his people. E

IESVIT. §. 4. A Inconueniences which may come by occa­sion of Images, easily preuented, and their vtilities very great.

ANother Argument against Images, Protestants much vrge, That they be stumbling blocks for simple people, B who easily take an Image to be the very God, euen as the Pagans did in former time; to this purpose bringing some Testimonies out of S. Augustine. August. Ep. 49. & in Psal. 113.

ANSWER.

THis is not the Protestants Obiection, but the Iesuits fiction, We say that Image worship is a stumbling blocke, both to the learned and the simple, for it is in it selfe a super­stition, C or vndue manner of Worship, neuer approoued or ra­tified, by any Precept, Promise, or blessing of God, in the Old Testament, or by Christ and his Apostles in the New.

Secondly, The manner of worshipping Images, according to the Popish tenet, is so subtill and intricate, euen to the lear­ned themselues, that it must of necessitie be difficile for the vn­learned to conceiue the same, and consequently, not to erre in the performance of it.

Thirdly, When it is performed with greatest intelligence, what fruit and reward can be reaped, other than such as our Sa­uiour D spake of the Pharisees, saying, In vaine doe you worship me, teaching for Doctrines the Precepts of men.

And although Saint Augustine, Epist. 49. and againe, sup. Psal. 113. speaketh literally of Pagan Images, yet hee decla­reth in generall, the perill which all Images (being adored) may bring vnto weaker mindes, and condemneth the vse of them, euen when they are not adored for themselues, but made in­struments to worship God; saying in one place, August. d. Consens. Euang. lib. 1. cap. 10. Sic omnino errare [...] qui Christum & Apostolos eius non in sanctis codicibus, sed in pictis parietibus quaesierunt. Thus haue they deserued to erre, which sought Christ in painted Images, and not in E written Bookes.

IESVIT. A

To this I answere, First, that this may seeme a great wrong, not onely to the Christian Church, but also to Christ himselfe, to thinke that men indued with his know­ledge and Faith, and made partakers of the light, whereby they beleeue the most high, diuine, and incomprehensible my­steries which he reuealed to the world, should so easily be B carried away into such blockish errors, as to thinke a stocke or stone to be God; a blindnesse scarce incident vnto men, except they be wholly destitute of all heauenly conceits, and nuzled vp in their Cradle in that persuasion, as Panims were, of whom onely Saint Augustine speakes; for they did not onely want this light of Christian instruction, but also were taught by their Ancestors, that in their Jdoles a kind of diuine vertue or Godhead was lodged, in and Concil. Trid. Sess. 25. Non quod cre­datur aliqua in eis inesse diuinitas vel virt' propter quam sint colendae. affiged vnto them: Whereas Catholicke Doctrine tea­cheth C the contrarie, That our Images are bare resemblances of holy persons, no diuinitie, no vertue, no dignitie, no [...], that makes them venerable, being in them, but in the Prototype.

ANSWER.

Image worship may bee a scandall to Christian people, al­though they offend not so rudely and grossely in their wor­ship, D as Panims did: and yet that Image worship hath beene a stumbling blocke to many Christians, Papists themselues testifie.

Ludouicus Viues, an eye witnesse of that he spake, saith Ludouic. Vin. in Aug. d. Ciu. Dei. l. 8. c. 27., Non video in multis quod sit discrimen inter eorum opinionem de Sanctis, & id quod Gentiles putabant de dijs suis: I cannot perceiue, touching many things, what difference there is betweene their opinion of Saints, and that which the Gentiles had concerning their gods. And if Christians were in no perill of Idolatrie by worshipping Images, why doth Gerson complaine Gers. to. 1. d. prob. Spirit. num. 17. lit. 10. [...] su­perstitiones in populis, quae Religionem inficiunt Christianam, dum sicut olim Iudaei sola signa quaerunt, dum Imaginibus exhibent [...] cultum: dum insuper hominibus nedum canonizatis, Scripturis quoque non au­thenticis plusquam Sanctis in Euangelio praestant fidem., that su­perstition E had infected Christian Religion, and that people, [Page 269] like Iewes, did onely seeke after fignes, and yeeld diuine ho­nour A to Images. And the same Author affirmeth Id. to. 3. d. Ex­erc. Deuot. simpl. Poterit continge­re, dum homo ni­mis cogirat cum I­maginibus, & de re­rum corporaliū cir­cústantijs, vt prop­ter phantasiae fluxi­bilitatem, & inuisi­bili hoste illudente & cooperante, de­ueniat à deuotis & pijs cogitationibus ad cogitatus turpes & impios, à puris affectionibus ad immundas, à Spiritualibus ad carnales, & nonnunquam à Sanctis cogitationibus ad execrandae blasphemiae cogitationes, prout in nonnullis deuotis personis in his incautis, compertum quando (que) est. In ipsa etiam veneranda. Imagine crucifixi, ex nimia fixa consideratione circa corporis Dominici nuditatem eius (que) foemoralium. Qui casus sicut mulierculis est valde possibilis, sic vice versa poterit casus iste & viris esse non impossibilis, si nimis figantur eorum cogitatus erga sanctarum virginum Imagines corporeas, prout etiam experientia nonnullos docuit., that some deuout people, by aspect of Images, were diuerted from holy cogitations and pure affections, to carnall, execrable, and blas­phemous thoughts. And Cornelius Agrippa Cornel. Agrip. d. van. scient. d. Imag. fol. 73. col. 2. saith, Dici non po­test guanta superstitione ne dicam Idololatria, penes rudem & indoctam plebem alatur in Imaginibus, conniuentibus ad haec Sacerdotibus, hinc non paruum lucri questum percipientibus: It is not to bee spoken, how great Idolatrie is fostered among rude people by Image worship, while the Priests conniue at these things, and make no small gaine thereby. B

Durandus Mimatensis saith Durand. Ratio­nal. Diu. l. 1. c. 3. n. 4. Possunt simplices & infirmi (per ni­mium & indiscri­tum imaginum v­sum) facile ad Ido­lolatriam trahi., That weake and simple people, by indiscreet, and too much vsing of Images, may be drawne to Idolatrie. And Gabriel Biel Biel. Can. Miss. lect. 49. lit. v. Ex illis patet, quorun­dam hominum sto­lidus error, qui a­deò ad Imagines afficiuntur, vt in ip­sis credant esse ali­quid Numinis, gra­tiae, vel sanctitatis, quib' potentes fint facere miracula, praestare sanitates, eripere à periculis, & à nocumentis ac insidijs praeseruare. Ib. Arguitur ex eo­dem: nonnullorum indocta simplicitas & indiscretio qua reuerentius adorant Imagines pulchras, quam turpes nouas quam vetustas, aut è contra orna­tas venustiori auro & purpura quam nudas: credentes eos eo Sanctiores quo pretiosiores. saith, That some people are so foolish, as that they thinke some deitie or sanctitie to be in Images, whereby they are C able to worke meruailes, to conferre bodily health, to deliuer from dan­gers, nocuments, and deceits: and their ignorant simplicitie and in­discretion is such, that they more reuerently adore faire Images than foule, antient Images than such as are newly made, such as are cloa­thed richly with gold and purple than those which are naked. Cas­sander saith Cass. Consult. d. Imag. manifestius est, quam vt multis verbis explicari debeat, imaginum & simulachrorum cultum nimium in va­luisse, & affectioni seu [...] superstitioni populi, plus satis indultum esse, ita vt ad summam adorationem, quae vel à Paganis, suis simulachris exhiberi consueuit, & ad extremam vanitatem quam Ethnici in suis simulachris E & imaginibus effingendis & exornandis admiserunt, nil à [...] reliqui factum esse videatur., It is more manifest, than that it can bee denied, That the worship of Images and Idoles hath too much preuailed, and the superstitious humour of people hath beene so cockered, that nothing hath beene omitted among vs, either of the highest Adoration or va­nitie of Panims, in worshipping and adoring Images. Polydore Polyd. Virg. d. Inuent. lib. 6. cap. 13. Caeterum illud atque adeo desiderari possit vt Sacerdotes frequentius populum docerent, quonam pacto deberent & venerari eiusmodi Imagines & apud eas sua offerre donaria, quam quia illi tacent, & vulgo ex suo vsu tacere putantur, id circo eo insaniae deuentum est, vt haec pietatis pars parum differat ab impietate: sunt enim bene multi [...], stupidioresque qui Saxeas vel ligneas [...], aeneas, seu in pa­rietibus pictas, varijsque coloribus litas Imagines colant non vt [...], sed perinde quasi ipsae sensum aliquem ha­beant, & ijs magis fidant quam Christo, vel alijs diuis quibus dicatae sint. al­so D saith, People are growne to such madnesse, that this pietie (of Image worship) differs little from impietie, for there are many rude and stupid persons, which adore Images of wood, stone, marble, and brasse, or painted in windowes, not as signes, but as though they had sence, and they repose more trust in them, than in Christ or the Saints, [Page 270] to which they are dedicated. And Simon Maiolus Maiolus, Def. Imag. Cent. 9. c. 19. Agrestes quidam I­magines ipsas Dei loco habét. L. [...] Sum. Eccles. p. 3. c. 3. In Asturijs, Cantabria, & Galetia nostrae Hispaniae, &c. adeò gens affecta est truncis cor­rosis, & deformibus Imaginibus, vt me teste, quoties Episcopi illas renouant, & decentiores loco illarum ponere iubent in suis paraeciarum visitationibus, veteres suas [...] plorantes, & nouas nequè aspicere velint, quasi non idem Prototypum, &c., a most eagre A defender of Iconolatrie, confesseth, That some rurall persons esteeme Images as if they were God.

Therefore, seeing such abuses and Idolatries are committed among Christians, in the worship of Images, as the former Authors report, we haue no reason to beleeue the Iesuits bare B word, affirming, that presupposing the diligence of the Church, instructing ignorant people, there can be no superstition or ido­latrie committed in worshipping Images.

IESVIT.

Secondly such Idols as Panims adored, many of them did by the Diuels meanes ordinarily speake, giue answers, moue, and exercise other actions of life, so that their spea­king C was not accounted miraculous and extraordinarie, but rather their silence: which speakings were verie potent to persuade men to beleeue what their ancestors told them, that those verie stocks and stones were Gods, or had a god­head affixed vnto them: now these kind of things seldome happen in our Images, scarce once in an age: and when they happen, they were taken as miracles, wrought not by the Images, or any vertue residing in them, but by Gods infi­nite power: nor are they brought to prooue any excellencie D affixed vnto the Image, but only that God liketh that we should honour our Sauiour, and his Saints, in their Images.

ANSWER.

The Iesuit confesseth, that Popish Images did sometimes speake Simon [...], Def. sacr. Imag. Centur. 7. c. 4. Ima­go Christi Basilium Praesbyterum allo­quitur., moue Vincent. spec. hist. Quem à piscatoribus inuentum, & in Basilica Apostolorum principis loculo deporta­tum, quaedam Sanctorum Imagines adorasse, & venerabilitèr salutasse visae sunt, palàm omnibus. Math. Paris. Chron. pa. 360. Quotiescunquè miles genua flexit, vt Imaginem adoraret, Imago Crucifixi ad genu flexiones eius, caput & collum humilitèr inclinauit. Catherin. d. sanct. glor. lib. 2. pag. 71. De Crucifixi Imagine Neapoli, illud Christi oraculum Thomas noster audiuit: benè de me scripsisti Thoma. B. quoquè Brigitta, &c., &c. but then hee affirmeth, that this hap­pened by miracle, and by the infinit power of God: but he must remember, that other learned Pontificians say, That this latter happened sometimes by the fraud of the Diuel, and chea­ting E [Page 271] of Priests, as well as the fotmer, which he reporteth of Pa­nims. A Gabriell Biel saith Biel. Can. miss. lect. 49. lit. X. Quod si aliquando mira­cula fiunt, homini bus etiam ad ea cō ­fluentibus, adiuto­ria, aut sanitates praestantur, non baec [...] tute Imagi­nū sed virtute Dei, ministerio bonorū Angelorum, ad in­tercessiones San­ctorum contingunt vel etiàm nonnunquam operatione Doemonum, ad fallendum [...] cultores, Deo permittente, exìgen­te talium infidelitate., That by the permission of God, punishing infidelitie, miracles are sometimes wrought by the Diuell, working by Images. And Espencoeus Espenc. Com. 2. Timoth. c. 4. nu. 21. pag. 151. hath these words, That some in the se­cond Nicene Synod propugned Images, Doemonum spectris, by Ap­paritions, which proceeded of the Diuell. William Malmesburie Malmsb. d. gest. Reg. Ang. lib. 2. cap. 9. re­porteth how the Crucifix vttered a speech concerning S. Dun­stan. But Polidore Virgill Polider. Hìst. [...]. lib. 6. in his Chronicle, speaking of the cre­dit of this miracle, saith, It was thought by many, that this was ra­ther an Oracle of Apollo, than of God, and that it proceeded from the fraud of men, and not from diuine power. B

IESVIT.

Finally, I dare say, That vulgar and ordinarie Prote­stants in England, by reading of the Bible in their mother tongue, are in greater danger to beleeue, that God is a body, and hath all the parts thereof, euen as hath a man, than C any the simplest Catholicke is to thinke an Image to bee God. This is prooued to be likely, because it is impossible to conceiue God otherwise than in the forme of a corporall thing: and (as the Oratour saith) we easily flatter ourselues Cicero de Natura Deorum. to thinke our shape the fairest, and so the fittest for God: Wherefore it is easie for men to assent to this error, vnto which the best and greatest wits that euer were, Tertul­lian, Tertul. apud Aug. d. Haeres Haer. 86. August. lib. 3. Con­fess. c. 7. and S. Augustine, whilest he was a Manichee did as­sent: D much more easily therefore may ignorant people be de­ceiued herein, through weakenesse of conceit, and inclinati­on of nature, when they read the Scripture describing God, as hauing the forme and shape of man, with head, face, eyes, eares, hands, feet. On the contrarie side, neuer any Christian did teach, that the Image of Christ is true­ly Christ, or a liuing thing; nor euer did any man or wo­man, except some few, and these verie simple and E sencelesse, (if such Histories be true) fall into such foo­lish imagination.

ANSWER. A

I perceiue whereat you aime, in this odious comparison: you would haue Gods booke buried in darkenesse, and com­pell Christians to seeke Christ and his Apostles in painted walls, and dead statues Aug. d. Con­sens. Euang. li. 1. ca. 10. Sic omninò er­rare meruerunt, qui Christum & Apo­stolos eius, non in sanctis codicib', sed in pictis parietibus quesierunt.. And whereas you say, vulgar and or­dinarie Protestants in England, (not in Scotland, France, Den­marke, &c.) by reading of the Bible in their mother tongue: (and yet Tertullian and S. Augustine, in whom you giue instance, read the Bible in a Latin Translation) are in greater danger to beleeue B that God is a bodie, &c. than any the simplest Catholicke is to thinke an Image to be God: It is answered, That notwithstanding your I dare say: you are not able to prooue, that any person, ciuile or rude, hath (at any time, among vs) beene infected with the Hu­maniformian errour, by hearing or reading the Bible. I maruell also why you ranke not the Apostles Creed among prohibited Bookes, as well as vulgar translations of the Bible; for igno­rant people, rehearsing the article, He sitteth at the right hand of God, might more easily imagine God to be corporeall, than by reading Scripture; because herein, that which in one Text is de­liuered C metaphorically, is plainely and spiritually declared in other Texts; and the like is not done in the briefe summarie of the Creed. But on the contrarie, many of your owne Do­ctors (formerly cited) complaine of the brutish superstition committed by sundrie of your people, in worshipping Images. It may be, they thinke not the Images which they adore, to be verie God (for Heathen people were scarcely so rude Origen. c. Cels. lib. 7. Celsus haud­quaquàm pro Dijs [...] se ha­bere affirmat, sed Dijs dicata. Clem. Ro. Recog. li. 5. p. 73. Per alios Serpens ille proferre verba huiusmodi solet: nos ad honorem inuisibilis Dei, Imagines [...] adoramus. Arnob. c. Gent. lib. 6. Deos inqui­tis per simulachra adoramus. Aug. in Psal. 113. Non hoc visibile colo, sed numen quod illis inuisibilitèr [...], (dixerunt Pagani.) Chrys. Orat. 12. d. Prima Dei noticia. Maximus Tyreus. serm. 38. (asseuerant Gentiles) sum­mum, primum maximum Deum creatorem omnium & [...] à se in simulachris, &c. coli. Iulianus. ap. Surium. to. 5. fol. 881. Non tanquam Deos colunt eorum Imagines, &c. Ferus. sup. Act. Apost. ca. 17. Tam etsi Gen­tiles, Idola sibi praestituebant, tamen eorum animus erat, vero Deo cultum exhibere.) yet they may beleeue they are the seat of God, and that some di­uine maiestie and power is inhabiting in them; or that they are diuine instruments to conuey graces and benefits to people D which adore them; and that in worshipping them, they merit saluation, and the like.

Now as for the letter of sacred Scripture, if any rude per­son should sucke errour from thence, the offence is taken, and E not giuen (for the reading thereof is lawfull and holy.) But when Roman Masters impose adoration of Images vpon simple people, if these be ensnared by that action, the scandall is actiue, and it is extreme presumption in the Roman Cler­gie, to prescribe a forme of worship (neuer approoued or com­mended, [Page 273] but alwaies censured by holy writ) which being omit­ted A can hurt none, but being obserued endangereth many.

Lastly, you censure Tertullian for holding the Deitie to be corporeall: but S. Augustine August. Quod vult. De: Haeres. 86. Nec tamē hinc Haereticus credi­tur esse factus. Pos­set enim quoquam modo putari, ipsam naturam, substan­tiamquè diuinam corpus vocare, non tale corpus cuius partes aliae maio­res, aliae minores valeant vel debeāt cogitari, &c. sed quià non est nihil, non est inanitas, nō est corporis [...] a­nimae qualitas, sed vbiquè totus, & per [...] spacia nul­la partitus: In sua tamen natura & substantia [...] permanet. Idem d. Genes. ad Lit. li. 10. cap. vltimo. Vide Tertul. c. Marcion. li. 2. Nam & dextram & occulos, & pedes Dei legimus, nec ideo tamen humanis [...], quià de appellatione soci­antur. C Quanta erit diuersitas diuini & humani corporis sub eisdem nominibus [...]. Jd. c. Hermog. Cum ipsa substantia corpus sit rei cuiusquè. Id. d. Anima. c. 7. si non corpus., to whom you referre vs, ex­poundeth his Tenet more fauourably, affirming, that he was no Heriticke in this point, because he may be expounded, as speaking figuratiuely; and by Corpus, a bodie, he might vnder­stand a thing substantiall, reall, immutable, quia non est nihil, non est inanitas, non est qualitas, &c. he is not nothing, an inanitie, a qualitie, or accident, but abideth firme and inuariable in his na­ture. Neither yet affirmeth S. Augustine, either of himselfe B when he was a Manichee, or of Tertullian, that they were lead into their error by reading the Scripture. And it is more pro­bable, that the Manichees sucked their false opinion from the Gentiles, rather than from the letter of the Scriptures, because they wholly reiected the old Testament, in which principally is found the description of the Deitie, by figures of things cor­poreal: neither regarded they Apostolicall Scriptures, but coi­ned a Gospell according to their owne fancie Prateol. Elench. Haer. li. 11. d. Ma­nich. n. 15. Totum vetus Testamentum reijciebant. Neque [...] recipiebant Apostolorum libros, sed sua [...] singularia comminiscebantur, quae Christi Euangelium vocabant..

IESVIT.

More, our Children, and ignorant people, are in the Catholicke Church often and plentifully instructed against such errors, as by our Catechismes may appeare; and parti­cularly D by Jesuits, who make a solemne vow, to keepe their Institutes, specially about teaching the rudiments of Faith vnto common and ignorant people. Hence it is, that in townes where they dwell, and villages about, on Sundaies and holy daies, besides their Sermons for people more in­telligent, they teach without faile vnto children, and men of ruder sort, the forme of Christian Doctrine, and vse all industry by giuing rewards vnto children, and by bestowing E almes on poore people, to make them willing and diligent in this learning. In the English Church, what is done for the instruction of the ignorant in their rudiments of Faith by Ministers and Pastors, as I know not much, so will I [Page 274] say nothing, but only that the time they spend in the praises of A sole Faith, and about the secrets of Predestination, and in long bitter inuectiues against our Doctrines misvnder­stood, if not purposely misrelated, might in my opinion more profitably bee spent in declaring the Creed, and prime Principles of Christianitie, in plaine and Catechi­sticall manner.

ANSVVER. B

How plentifull your instruction of ignorant people at this present time is, I will not examine; but it is not long since some of the best learned of your part affirmed, That through­out the whole Christian state, there was so extreame sloath, concer­ning these things, that one should finde many in all places, expresly knowing no more, concerning God and things Diuine, than Pa­gans Nauar. Ma­nual. Confess. c. 11. n. 6. pa. 165. In vniuersa Repub. Christiana tanta est circa haec socor­dia, vt mulcos pas­sim inuenias, ni­hil magis in par­ticulari, & expli­citè de rebus hisce credere, quam Eth­nicum quendam Philosophum, sola vnius veri Dei na­turali cognitione praeditum.. And Espenceus, vpon the 2. Tim. 3. n. 17. pag. 118. saith An verò benè ac diuinitus edu­cati edoctiue pueri, hodie iuxta scomma Propheticum, Esa. 65. Prope centenarij, hoc est Christiani ve­tuli & seniculi, qui non minus fidunt aut tribuunt Diuis quam Deo: qui hunc quam illos minus placabilem, aut exorabilem putant? Vtinam mentiar, & nulli sunt huiusmodi. Noui certe veteranum & generosum equi­tem, qui de Spiritu Sancto quid [...], ingenue confitebatur, vt apud lucam Act. 19. Ephesij, id quod erat, nec vnquam se, si vllus esset Spiritus Sanctus, audiuisse., Are children well and religiously educated? yea ac­cording to that Propheticall derision, Esay 65. Children of an hundred yeeres, that is, aged and decrepite Christians, trust as much, C and yeeld as much to Saints as to God, and thinke that God is lesse mercifull, and harder to bee intreated than Saints. I knew (saith this Authour) an antient and noble Knight, who being deman­ded, What hee beleeued concerning the holy Ghost, confessed freely, like [...] Ephesians, Acts 19. That he [...] not whether there was any holy Ghost. Also the Catechismes of Ledesma, Bellarmine, &c. are extant, wherein few instructions are found, suffici­ent to preuent the former errour, whereinto ignorant people may easily fall. D

You descend in the next place, to depresse the English Church, accusing the Pastors thereof, of negligence, in tea­ching the Principles of Christian Faith, and spending their time in the praises of sole Faith, and about the secrets of Pre­destination, E and making Inuectiues against your Doctrine mis­vnderstood.

But you looke vpon vs with an euill eye, and your Asper­sions are enuious.

[Page 275] First, the Canons of our Church Constit. & [...]. Eccles. can. 59. Euery Parson, Vi­car, or Curate vp­on cuery Sunday and Holy day, before Euening prayer, shall for halfe an houre, or more, examine and [...] the youth and ignorant persons of his Parish in the [...] Commandementi, the Articles of the Be­leese, and in the Lords prayer, &c. impose catechising, no A lesse than preaching; and the negligence of delinquents in dis­charging this duty is punishable by Ecclesiasticall censures.

Secondly, the faith which our Ministers are to preach, ac­cording to the doctrine of the Church of England, is a liuely and operatiue Faith, and this Faith alone, and no other, can iusti­fie and saue the soule. B

Thirdly, it is not lawfull for Preachers to spend their time in confuting Papists, vnlesse they vnderstand their Tenet, and are able to prooue the same to be wicked and false. And although our Tenet concerning Predestination, be no other than what Saint Augustine and his schollers maintained against the Pelagi­ans, and which hath beene holden Orthodoxall by the best lear­ned in the Church of Rome it selfe, yet our Church is most cautelous in preuenting offences, which may ariseby vndiscreet handling of this doctrine; and a most prouident restraint is made among vs in this behalfe, by superiour authoritie. C

I might here retort vpon the Aduersarie, the abuses of his owne Church, in all or some of these kinds; but this were to wander from the disputation, and to giue occasion of further excursion, to one, Cui verbosa lingua est, cor vero obtenebratum, as S. Cyril Cyril. c. Iul. li. [...]. anciently spake.

IESVIT.

Besides, it is easie for the Romane Church, to keepe her children from beleeuing that Images be Gods, or true li­uing D things; or that any diuinitie or diuine vertue resides in them, as may be prooued (conuincingly in my iudgement) by experience had of her power in this kind about a point more difficile. For what may seeme more euident, than that a consecrated Host is bread, of which foure sences, sight, feeling, smell, tast, giue in euidence, as of bread, no lesse verily than any other, so farre as they can discerne? and yet so potent is the Word, and doctrine of the Church, groun­ded E on generall Councells, declaring the word of God for Transubstantiation, as Catholikes denying their sences, be­leeue assuredly, that what seemeth bread, is not bread, [Page 276] but the true body of our Sauiour, vnder the formes and ac­cidents A of bread. Now can any man with any shew of the least probabilitie in the world, thinke that it is difficile for this Church, to persuade her children that the Image of Christ is not a liuing thing, or bath any Godhead or liuing diuine power lodged in it, as plaine Scriptures shew, and generall Catholike Councells (particularly the Tridentine and Nicene) define; which doctrine neither reason nor Cone. Trid. Sess. 25. Cone. Nic. 2. Act. 7. sence can dislike? or shall the sole similitude of members cor­respondent B vnto humane liuing members, which Images haue, so much preuaile in Catholike minds, so to bow downe their thoughts to base Idolatrie, as to thinke a stocke or stone to be God, and that the Church shall not be able by teaching, to erect them to a more high and diuine appre­hension, being able to make them firmely beleeue a consecra­ted Hoast is not really bread, against the Iudgement that they would otherwise frame, vpon most notorious euiden­cie C of sence?

ANSVVER.

This passage is wasted in magnifying the power which the Roman Church hath in preseruing her adheres from the infe­ction of superstition, in worshipping Images. The argument vsed by the Idolist to this purpose, is:

The Roman Church, performeth that which is more difficile; to wit, it persuadeth people, contrarie to the experience of all their D senses, to beleeue, that consecrate bread is not bread, but the true body of Christ, vnder the formes and accidents of bread.

Therefore it is able to persuade people, that the Images which they adore, are not very God, or that any diuinitie or diuine ver­tue resides in them.

I answer, that it is not more difficile, to persuade some peo­ple, to beleeue transubstantiation, than to rectifie their iudge­ment, in adoration of Images: for mans nature being of it selfe E (through inbred corruption) prone to beleeue lies, and the mem­bers of Antichrist hauing a speciall curse of God vpon them, 2. Thes. 2. 10, 11. no maruell if they credit false doctrine, al­though it be most absurd. But they which beleeue and obey their Masters, when they teach lyes, doe not alwayes follow [Page 277] their directions, if they instruct them in truth. Neither are A such people free from scandall, iustly taken, if they conceiue not images to be Gods, or indued with diuine vertue residing in them, for without such imagination, they performe an vnlaw­full worship, neuer instituted Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. li. 3. c. 9. Qui operatur aut veneratur, vtile fignum diuinitus institutum., but alwayes condemned by the Holy Ghost. And this alone without further abuses, is suffici­ent to condeme the doctrine and practise of the Romane Church.

IESVIT. B

The Protestant Church on the other side, may seeme to haue no great vigor, by preachings to persuade common people against the errour of the Anthropomorphits, seeing their principle is, That a world of Preachers is not to bee beleeued against the euident Scripture. Yea that a common D. Iohn White in his Way, pa. 59. ordinarie man, by Scripture may oppose as great, and a greater Church, than is the whole Protestant. Which principle being laid, how will they conuince people, that C that God is a pure Spirit, whom the Scripture doth so per­petually set forth, as hauing humane members? I may con­clude therefore, that their translating of Scripture into the vulgar languages, breedes more danger vnto common people, than our making of Images.

ANSWER.

The Iesuit is fallen vpon a Paradoxe, affirming that there is D more danger, for Protestants to be mislead, by reading Scrip­tures translated, into the errour of the Humaniformians, than the Papists to be seduced by images. And his reason is, because Protestant Ministers cannot by preaching the contrarie do­ctrine, persuade people to desist from any errour, which seemes to them agreeable to any literall text of holy Scripture: for one of their owne principles is, That a world of Preachers, is not to be beleeued against euident Scripture, &c. and he citeth M r. Iohn White in his Way, pag. 59. I perceiue, it is impossible E for Papists to deale sincerely. M r. Iohn White affirmeth not, that euery priuate person, or that any companie of people whatsoeuer, are to be credited vpon the sole allegation of a text of Scripture, expounded as the outward letter soundeth: for we know, that sometimes the letter killeth, and Saint Au­gustines [Page 278] rule Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. li. 3. c. 10. Et iste omnino modus est, vt quic­quid in sermone diuino, neque ad morum [...], neque ad fi­dei veritatem pro­prie referri potest, figuratum esse cognoscas. Ibid. c. 16. Si flagitium aut facinus iubere, aut vtilitatem aut beneficentiam vetare, figurata est. Nisi manducaueritis inquit, carnem filij hominis & sanguinem biberitis, non habebitis vitam in vobis, facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere. Figura est ergo, praecipiens passioni Domini esse, communican­dum, & suauiter atque vtiliter recondendum in memoria, quod pro nobis caro eius crucifixa, & vulnerata sit. B Id. d. [...]. ad lit. li. 8. c. 2., concerning Scriptures exposition, is neither A strange, nor vnpractised by vs: but M r. Iohn Whites doctrine is, That if foure hundred Baalites, or a whole Councell of Pharisees, or Er­rants, deliuer vntruths, one Micajah, one Stephen, one Athanasius, in whose mouth is fouud the word of Truth, although the persons seeme neuer so priuate, must be preferred before them, which teach lyes, or doctrine repugnant to holy Scripture Chrys. d. Lazar. Hom. 4. Etiamsi mortuus reuiuiscat etiamsi Angelus de coelo descendat maxime omnium credendum eft Scripturis. Et. Hom. d. expulsipsius. tom. 5. Habeo Scripturam Domini mei, manum [...] teneo, illa [...] cautio fatis tuta est, illa me securum reddit & intrepidum etiamsi or­bis teriae commoueatur ego cautionem Domini mei teneo, lego manum eius ipsa mihi murus est inexpug­nabilis., truely expounded.

IESVIT.

But they will say the translation of Scripture into vul­gar languages, is commanded in the Scripture, and the A­postles and Apostolicall Church practised it. Whereas wee C cannot prooue by Scripture, that the Apostles did warrant, or practise the setting vp of Images. This they say with great confidence. But what substantiall proofe is of this their saying, I could neuer reade or heare. The testimo­nies they bring in this behalfe (Search the Scriptures: Let his word dwell plentifully among you, &c.) are insufficient Ioh. 5. v. 39. Colloss. 3. v. 16. to prooue a direct and expresse precept or practise, of tran­slating Scriptures into the vulgar tongue. D

ANSWER.

Wee affirme with great confidence, both that the reading of holy Scripture by Lay people (which must needes imply Translation of them) is a Diuine Ordinance, and that Image worship was neither warranted by the Apostles, nor practised by the Primatiue Church succeeding the Apostles.

Neither doe wee alledge onely those Sentences of holy Scripture, Iohn 5. 39. Collos. 3. 16. which the Iesuit thinkes himselfe able to elude by subtile distinctions, as the Arrians E in times past eluded the Text of Saint Iohn, Cap. 10.30. But we cite also the Precept of God giuen to the Church, before Christ his comming, and the perpetuall practise of the god­ly, in the Old and New Testament, and the vehement exhor­tations [Page 279] of the Primatiue Fathers, exhorting Lay people to the A reading and meditation of holy Scripture, and magnifying the fruit and benefit arising from thence. The Eunuch is com­mended for reading holy Scripture, Acts 8. 28. The Baereans are called Noble, by the holy Ghost, for searching the holy Scriptures, Acts 17. 11. Hee is called Blessed which readeth and heareth, Apoc. 1. 3. The Galathians read the Scripture, Gal. 4.21. The Ephesians, Cap. 3.4. The Collossians, Cap. 4. 16. The Thessalonians, 1. Thes. 5.27. The Fathers are so plen­tifull in this Argument, as I haue elsewhere shewed Def. of my Brother. pag. 42, &c., that it would astonish any man who hath read them Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 7. pag. 245. Orig. in Esa. Hom. 2. Chrys. d. Paradis. & Proem. ad Rom. & sup. Gen. Hom. 6. 8. 10. 12. 14. 21. 29. 35. 59. & d. verb. Esa. Hom. 2. & sup. Rom. Hom. 30. & sup. Matth. Hom. 2. & 48. & d. Lazaro. Hom. 3. & 4, &c. Hieron. Epist. 7. & 9. & 10. & 14. & 29. & 30. & sup. Ezech. 45. Ambros. Serm. 35. August. Epist. 120. c. 37. & d. Temp. Serm. 55. & 56. Cyril. c. Julian. lib. 7. Theoderit. d. cur. Graec. Affect. [...]. 5. & 8. Jsiodor. Pelusiot. lib. 1. Epist. 24. Isiodor. Hispal. d. sum. bon. lib. 1. cap. 18. Gregor. Mag. sup. Euang. Hom. 15. & sup. Ezech. li. 2. Hom. 15. & Dial. lib. 4. c. 14. & lib. 4. Epist. 40. Ephrem. d. pat. & consum. secul. Damasc. Orthod. fid. lib. 4. cap. 18. Beda lib. 3. in Esdr. cap. 18. Theophil. in Eph. 6. Bernard. Serm. 55. tract. Modus bene viuendi adsorores. C, to behold such B impudencie in Papists, as to denie this Practise to haue beene Primatiue and Catholicke. But necessitie hath no Law, for if the Scriptures may be suffered to speake, Papistrie must fall, like Dagon before the Arke.

IESVIT.

Catholickes on the contrary side, though they boast not of Scriptures, (as knowing that nothing is so clearely set downe in it, but malapert errour may contend against it with some shew of probabilitie) yet haue Scriptures much more cleare and expresse than any that Protestants can D bring for themselues, euen about the vse of the Image of Christ crucified in the first Apostolicall Church: S. Paul to the Galathians saith, O ye foolish Galathians, who hath Galath. 3. [...]. 1. bewitched you, that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Christ Iesus is liuely set foorth crucified among you. The Greeke word corresponding to the English, liuely set foorth, is [...], which signifies, to paint foorth a thing; insomuch as euen Beza, Iesus Christus depictus E crucifixus, Iesus Christ painted, crucified before your eyes: so that we haue in plaine and expresse tearmes, that Christ was Painted crucified, in the Apostolicall Churches, which the Apostle doth allow; thence drawing an Argument to [Page 280] prooue the Galathians were sencelesse and sottish, that A keeping in their sight Christ painted, as Crucified, they would be saued by the Law, and not by the merits of his Crosse: for it was madnesse and folly to paint Christ, and honour him as crucified, and not to thinke that by his death vpon the Crosse, he redeemed the world.

ANSVVER.

There is reason, why Romists (which stile themselues Ca­tholickes, B but are not Chrys. ex. var. in Math. Hom. 11. Nomen tuum chri­stianum sonat sed facta Antichristum monstrant. August. sup. Math. q. 11. Bo­ni Catholici sunt qui fidem integram sequuntur & bonos mores. Id. d. ver. Relig. c. 5. Catho­lici vel Orthodoxi nominantur, id est integritatis custo­des & recta sectantes.) should bee sparing in boasting of Scripture: but the reason assigned by the Aduersarie, which is, that Scriptures may be peruerted by Errants, is vnsufficient; for it is common to Tradition, and to Histories, and monuments of antiquitie, to be peruerted and abused, and the same hap­peneth not by the kind and nature of the Scripture Aug. d. Trin. l. 1. c. 3. Nec ipsis Sanctis diuinorum librorum, authoritatibus vllo modo quisquam recte tribuerit, tam multos & varios errores haereticorum, cum omnes ex eisdem Scripturis falsas atque fallaces opiniones suas conentur defendere., but ac­cidentally, through the malice and subtiltie of man, peruer­ting the right wayes of the Lord. And there is sufficient matter in the sacred Scripture, to demonstrate veritie, and to conuince Errants, when they peruert the right sence Gregor. Mor. l. 18. c. 8. Cum superbientes haereticos, & Sacrae Scripturae sententias deferentes, eisdem verbis atque sententijs quas proferunt vincimus, quasi [...] Goliam, suo gladio detruncamus.. C

And whereas you affirme in the next place, that Romists haue Scriptures more cleare and expresse, than any that Prote­stants can bring for themselues, euen about the vse of the I­mage of Christ. D

First, If this were true, it prooueth not the question, That Images ought to be worshipped, but onely that they may bee vsed, for Historie, Ornament, and Signification, as the Che­rubins, and other Pictures of the Temple, in the old Law; for Vse being a generall, and Worship a speciall, you cannot conclude affirmatiuely from the former to the latter A genere ad speciem non sequi­tur affirmatiue..

Secondly, You depart from your owne receiued Principles, when you indeuour to prooue Image worship by Scripture: for the same (according to your doctrine) is a diuine Tradi­tion E Azor. Instit. Mor. p. 1. li. 8. c. 4., and such a Tradition (according to learned Bannes) as is neither expresly nor infoldedly taught in holy Scripture Bannes in Tho. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. pa. 170. Orationes esse ad Sanctos faciendas, venerandas esse eorum Imagines, &c. Neque etiam impresse, neque inuolute, sacrae literae docent.. [Page 281] Wherefore then doe you attempt to prooue Iconolatrie out of A Scripture, which being in your Tenet a Tradition, is Doctrina tantum non Scripta Bellarm. d. verb. Dei l. 4. c. 2.: a Doctrine altogether vnwritten. It is a vaine thing to promise to fetch Treasure out of a Chest, or water out of a flint stone, in which a man himselfe confesseth there is none.

Thirdly, S t. Paul his Text, Galath. 3.1. Nullis machinis, can by no ingens or deuices be wrested to your Tenet. All Expo­sitors antient and moderne, which haue Commented vpon this Text, are against you, and you haue neither the letter nor mat­ter B of the Text fauourable to you. The word [...], vpon which you insist, is translated by your owne Interpretors Rhem. Gal. 3. 1. vet. Transl. Pro­scribed, and [...], Iud. v. 4. Prescribed; and [...], Rom. 15.4. Haue beene written; and [...], Eph. 3. 3. I haue written before. And whereas you flye to Beza, translating [...], Depictus, Painted before, he telleth you in his Anno­tation Bez. [...]. Gal. 3.1. [...], id est, quibus ita perspicue fuit exhibitus Christus vt quasi oculis ve­stris representata fuerit viua ipsius Imago, ac si apud vos ipsos esset cru­cifixus., that hee vnderstandeth not artificiall, but Theologi­call depainting, not externall but spirituall; to wit, by the eui­dent and powerfull Preaching, and Doctrine of Saint Paul, Christ Iesus was so liuely reuealed and set foorth to the vnder­standing of the Galathians, as if they had indeed beheld C him crucified before them. And in this manner Chrysostome Chrys. sup. 3. ca. Gal. Atqui non a­pud Gallatas sed Hierosolymis cru­cifixus fuerit, quo­modo igitur dicit in vobis? vt fidei vim ostenderet, quae possit & procul dis­sita cernere. Nec dixit crucifixus est sed prescriptus est crucifixus, indicans quod oculis fidei quidem exactius perspicerent, quam nonnulli qui presentes ad fuerant [...] quae gerebantur conspexerant. Illorum enim qui spectarant complures nullum inde fructum retulerunt, hij vero quae oculis ipsis non viderant, tamen per fidem euidentius viderant., Theophilact [...]. ib. prescriptus est igitur exacte, hoc est viua veluti Imagine expressa depictus est per predicationem, vos vero credentes predicationi, [...] presentem ipsum conspexistis., and Oecumenius Oecumen. ib. [...]. expound Saint Paul, and with them agree your owne Doctors, Aquinas Aquin. ib. proscriptio Christi qui damnatus est in mortem, adeo vobis manifesta [...], ac si ante oculos vestros fuisset. Vasq. Paraph. in Gal. 3. O stulti Galatae, quis vos aspectu malefico tanquam pueros in fide recens natos laesit, & veluti incantationibus delusit, vt vos (quibus per meam predicationem Euan­gelij ita expositum est Christi Euangelium & ipsius Christi. Passio vt certius sitis eum contemplat, quam quiipsum oculis tantum corporis viderunt) veritatem quam semel estis edocti non retineatis., Adam Sasbot Adam. Sasb. E ib. Vos inquam ante quorum oculos Iesus Christus prescriptus est, vel vt alij legant proscriptus, id est, quibus per meam predicationem, sic est depictus Christus, & omnibus ob oculos expositus, tanquā inter vos esset crucifixus, vt multo certius illum fidei oculis sitis contemplati, quam qui illum coram viderunt, clauis cruci affigi., Estius, Cornelius, Iustinianus, Vasques, Salmeron, &c. There is no small difference betweene vocall and spirituall depainting; and betweene materiall or artificiall, betweene painting vpon mindes, and painting vpon materiall Tables, betweene intel­lectuall beholding Christ Iesus crucified, in the Storie of the Gospell, or in the Sacrament; and in a visible Statue, or pain­ted Table. And therefore from S t. Pauls affirming the former, D the Iesuits latter followeth not.

IESVIT. A

I know that some Catholickes expound this place, That Christ was painted out vnto the Galathians Meta­phorically by preaching, which I doe not denie, but this doth not repugne with the other sence, that he was also ma­terially painted as crucified, the which being more conforme to the natiue and proper signification of the words, is not to bee forsaken but vpon euident absurditie, especially, B seeing it hath more connexion with the drift of the Apostles discourse, which is, to prooue the Galathians sencelesse in forsaking Christ crucified painted before their eyes; for to forsake Christ crucified, set forth by preaching, as the Sa­uiour of the world, though it be impious, yet is not sence­lesse, yea rather Saluation by the Crosse of Christ, did seeme Praedicamus Iesum Christū Iudeis scā ­dalū gentibus stul­titiam, 1. Cor. 1.30. follie vnto the Gentiles. But to haue Christ painted as cru­cified before mens eyes, honouring him by Christian deuoti­on, C in regard of his crucifixion and death, and not to expect Saluation by him, is sottish and senceles. And of this mate­riall painting of Christ, Athanasius expoundeth this Athanas. ser. de. san­ctis Patriarch. & Prophet. apud Tur­rian. lib. 4. de Dog­mat. Charact. verbi Dei. place, whom Turrianus citeth: wherefore I may iustly say, that we haue more cleere and expresse Scripture, for the vse of Images, than haue Protestants for their vul­gar Translations.

ANSVVER. D

First, yeeld vs but one Father, or learned Papist, who in their Commentaries Harding, Gret­sar. Cabrera. &c. In disputation presse this place, but no learned Papist that I haue seene in their Commentary expound this place literally, according to your sence. Secondly, It is neither comformable to the signifi­cation of the words, for [...] signifieth, to be written afore, and not to be pictured before; neither hath it any ne­cessarie connexion with the drift of the Apostles discourse, &c. For the Galathians being Christians conuerted from infideli­tie, and not Heathens or Iewes (to whom the Crosse, or death of Christ vpon the Crosse, seemed foolishnesse, 1. Cor. 1.18.) E were more sencelesse, that is to say, more void of right iudge­ment, by forsaking Christ Iesus crucified, (which was by the preaching of the holy Ghost, and Sacraments ordained by God, euidently reuealed to their conscience, and receiued by Faith) than if they had forsaken him painted onely in a Cruci­fix; [Page 283] for, to forsake a thing written in the heart, and beleeued A vpon the Doctrine, and by the power of the holy Ghost, is farre more vnreasonable than to forsake that which is exhibi­ted by a dead and dumbe picture. Thirdly, your counterfeit Athanasius is a child of darkenesse, not placed at all in the workes of Athanasius by your selues: read the seuerall impres­sions of this Author, at Rome, Paris, Basill, &c. Anno 1520, 1555, 1564, 1572, 1581, 1582, 1598, 1608, and there is no such worke of his to be found: and therefore Harding, Turri­an, Gretsar, and your selfe abuse the world in alleading such ba­stardly stuffe. B

IESVIT.

And therefore the danger of ignorant peoples erring by Jmages, is without reason so much insisted vpon by Protestants, their English Translation being (as I haue shewed) a more dangerous blocke for fooles to stumble at, and so fall into damnable errors. If they presume that C by diligent instruction they may and would haue vs thinke, that they doe preserue their people from that error, why should they not thinke that the Roman Church being so po­tent with her children, can keepe them from the foolish er­ror, of attributing life and diuinitie vnto dead and dumbe Images? and that shee will so doe, being so strictly com­manded by the Councell of Trent, to vse her greatest dili­gence Concil. Trid. Sess. 25. Diligentèr do­ceant Episcopi, &c. in this point, that ignorant people fall not into er­ror by any Image, which otherwise haue many profits and D vtilities.

ANSWER.

It is possible for ignorant people, notwithstanding admoni­tions, to worship Images, not thinking actually of the Proto­type Petigian Sum. Theol. d. 9. q. 1. ar. 3. Possumus siftere in adoratione Imagi­nis solius, absquè hoc, quod adore­mus rem represen­tatam.: and in this case their worship is terminate in the verie Image. But it is needlesse for vs to insist vpon the matter of abuse, for if the thing it selfe, to wit, adoration of Images, be E vnlawfull, then it is in vaine to deliuer precepts and cautions to moderate excesse in the performance of it. But that adorati­on of Images is vnlawfull, it hath formerly beene prooued by the words of the morall Law, and the perpetuall practise of the Iewish Church Vasq. d. Ador. li. 2. disp. 4. c. 2. n. 66., and of the Primitiue Church for cer­taine [Page 284] ages, which neither worshipped Images, and which reie­cted A in a manner all vse of them in religion Clem. Alex. [...]. Nobis est aperte vetitum artem fallacem exercere. Non facies enim inquit Propheta, Exod 20. [...] rei similitudi­nem, &c. Iuslin. Mart. Dial. cum. Tryph. Annon Deus is erat, qui per Mosen sanxit, ne qua omninò [...], vel Ima­go vel similitudo, &c. Vide Euseb. Eccles. Hist. li. 7. ca. 17..

IESVIT.

About which, J will not inlarge my selfe, but onely men­tion some of them. The first is an easie and compendious way of instruction, in which respect they are tearmed by S. B Gregorie, The Bookes of the vnlearned: and (as another Greg. li. 7. Ep. 109. Nissen. Orat. in Theod. Gregorie saith) The silent Pictures speakes in the wall, and profiteth very much.

ANSWER.

This reason, whether it be true or false, serueth onely to commend the Historicall vse of Images; and yet some lear­ned Papists reiect this kind of teaching, by Images and Pi­ctures: Among which, Durand Dur. Ratio­nal. Diu. lib. 1. ca. 3. n. 4. saith, Ei autem quod dictum est, C quod Imagines sunt Laicorum literae, obuiat illud Euangelij, habent Mosen & Prophetas, The sentence of the Gospell (They haue Moses and the Prophets, let them heare them) is repugnant to that which is spoken by some, Images are lay-mens Bookes.

IESVIT.

The second, is to increase in men (that keepe and ho­nor them) the loue of God, and his Saints; which effect S. D Chrisostome experienced, as he testifieth, saying, J lo­loued a Picture of melted waxe full of Pietie. And S. Chryso. Orat. Quod noui & veteris Te­stamenti vnus sit Mediator. Greg. li. 7. Ep. 53. Gregorie the Great saith, They inflame men that behold them in the loue of their Lord and Sauiour. The third is, to moue and incite men to the imitation of the vertues of Christ, and his Saints: which vtilitie S. Basill doth declare, and highly esteeme in his Sermon of the fortie Martyres. Basil. Serm. in 40 Martyr. And examples might be brought of men reclaimed by sight E of godly Images, euen in the [...] of sinfull affection. The fourth is, to stay our thoughts vpon Christ, and his passion, that our imaginations in prayer may not so easily wander; which vse of Images, Catholickes in their deuotions do of­ten [Page 285] experience. Finally, that in his Jmage wee may honour A Christ, the honour of the Image redounding to the origi­nall: and who crowneth the Kings Image, honoureth the King whose Image it is, saith S. Ambrose. In which kind Ambros. Serm. 10. in Psalm. 119. memorable is the deuotion of our victorious and religious King Canutus, who tooke the Diademe that he vsed to weare on his owne head, and there with crowned an Image of Christ crucified, which in his daies was deuoutly reser­ued in the Church of S. Peter and S. Paul in Winchester; B and afterwards would neuer haue any crowne come on his head, out of humble reuerence to his crucified Lord.

ANSWER.

It is againe to little purpose, to examine the places of the Fa­thers, here produced, concerning the vtilitie which may follow vpon the visible aspect of Pictures & Images, for all these testi­monies serue only to commend Historicall vse, but they prooue not Adoration. Also the vtilitie of Images, mentioned by them, C is spoken onely according to their humane opinion. But that Images, by diuine institution, haue such vtilitie, or that God Almightie hath promised in his word any such effects and bles­sings vnto them, is not affirmed by the Fathers, neither can it be warranted by diuine reuelation.

S. Ambrose Serm. 10. in Psalm. 118. Ambr. [...]. 10. Psal. 118. Preuo­sum est [...] virū [...], & [...] e­um secundum [...] Dei. Si vi­de imus in pau­pere illum ad cuius [...] est, &c. Qui [...] Im­peratoris, vtiquè il­lum honorat cuius Imaginem coronat, &c. treateth of the liuely Images of God, to wit, iust persons, poore afflicted people, the members of Christ; these Images he exhorteth vs to honour, illustrating his Doctrine by an humane similitude, which is, He that crowneth the Image of the Emperour, honoureth him whose D Image he crowneth, &c. Then he applieth the former similitude, saying Vides quià in­tèr multas Christi Imagines ambulamus? Caueamus nè coronam Imagini detrahere videamur, quam [...] què Christus imposuit. E Caueamus neal quid [...] ijs quibus [...] debemus. Sed quod peius est, non solum non honesta­mus pauperes, [...] etiàm [...], destruimus, & persequimur, & ignoramus quas Dei Imagini, congeramus iniurias, cùm factos ad Imaginem Dei, putamus esse laedendos. Qui enim irridet pauperem, [...] eum, qui secit illum. Sed aderit ille [...], [...] & non de distis mihi manducare &c., By honouring the liuely Images of Christ, we worship Christ himselfe. But speaking of dead Statues and Pictures, he addeth, Gentiles lignum adorant, quia Dei Imaginem putant, sed inuisibilis Dei Imago, non in [...] est quod videtur, Gentiles adore wood, thin­king it the Image of God, but the Image of the inuisible God, is in that which is inuisible, and not in it which is seene.

As for your storie of Canutus (the first Danish king raigning in England) wherewith you close vp your question of Images, [Page 286] you name no Author, that so we might haue examined the qua­litie A of Canutus his action; and if the same happened according to your report, yet it is not antient, because it was a thousand yeeres and more after Christ Anno Dom. 1017. he began to reigne.: Neither is the consequence ne­cessarie, that because he placed his Crowne vpon an Image of the Crucifixe, therefore he worshipped the Image Ambros. Orat. Funebr. d. obit. Theodos. Inuenit ergo titulū, regem adorauit, non lig­num vtique, quia hic gentilis est error, & vanitas impiorum: sed adorauit illum, qui pependit in ligno, Scrip­tus in ligno.: B for Iacob powred oyle vpon the top of a Pillar, Gen. 28.18. yet his Ob­lation was made onely to the Deitie, and not to the Pillar.

Lastly, Let it be obserued, that our Aduersarie hath manife­sted wonderous weakenesse, in this Romish Article concerning worship of Images; for he hath not throughout his whole dis­putation, produced one plaine Text of holy Scripture, or one cleare sentence of Antiquitie, proouing the necessitie or law­fulnesse of Iconolatrie. Wherefore I conclude, that this do­ctrine is destitute of all diuine authoritie, written or vnwritten; and consequently, that they are impostors, which impose the same as a necessarie dutie vpon the Church of Christ.

The Second and Third Point. A PRAYINGS, AND OFFE­RING B OBLATIONS TO THE B. Virgin MARY.
WORSHIPPING, AND Inuocation of Saints, and C Angels.

IESVIT.

I Haue ioyned these two Con­trouersies together, hoping I might doe it with your Maiesties good D liking, the maine difficultie of them both, being the same, to wit, Wor­ship and Inuocation of Angels, and Saints. For I am most fully per­suaded, that if your Maiestie did allow Inuocation of any Opera Regia Re­spons. ad Ep. Card. Peron. pag. 402. Saint, you would neuer denie that Deuotion vnto the Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, whom you honour and re­uerence aboue the rest; though perchance you may dislike E some particular formes of our Prayers, that seeme to giue her Titles aboue that which is due to a Creature: about which, I shall in the end of this Discourse endeuour to giue your Maiestie satisfaction.

ANSVVER. A

ALthough it were granted, that some kind or manner of Peti­tion, or Compellation, made by the Church Militant to the blessed Saints, and Angels, were lawfull; and that we might request them to be Comprecants Alex. Hal. 4. q. 26. m. 2. Ar. 3. Solus Deus est sim­pliciter [...], &c. Sancti non simpli­citer, &c. Magis te­nent se ex parte O­rantium, quasi ad­iuuantes, quam il­lius qui oratur. E­stius, sup. Eph. 3. v. 12. Cath. sanctos inuocando, tantum eos adhibent vt comprecatores. Bu­cer. sup. Rom. 8. In­tercessio quàm pri­dem Diuis tribuunt Ecclesiae, non potest ex [...] statui aliud esse, quàm perpetua illorum vota, de nostra Redemptione consummanda. Quibus fidere ex se impium: quaerere ea in certum est: affectus tamen salutis qui eo [...] sese attollit, vt Diuorum quoque intercessionem in Christo, non prae Christo quaerit, non excutiens quam certum sit quò feratur, damnari non debet. Et hoc reuerentiae detu­lisse veterum obseruationi hac in re, quae scilicet vsu, nullo autem Oraculo Scripturae inoleuit satis fuerit., and to make in­tercession to God in our behalfe: B yet the Inuocation of them, accor­ding to the practise of the Romane Church, wherein they pray first of all to Saints, and in the last place, to Christ; and their excessiue worship, by Vowes, Oathes, Offertures, conioyning their satisfactions with Christs Bellarm. d. Indulg. lib. 1. c. 4. Non erit absurdum si sancti viri Redemptores nostri, aliquo modo, id est, se­cundum aliquid non simpliciter & largo modo, & non in rigore verborum esse dicantur. Biel, in Can. Miss. Lect. 30. K. Non frustra imploramus Sanctos quos non vt Creatores gratiae siue Beatificatores inuocamus: sed vt me­diatores, D quorum meritis & intuitu, nobis Deus confert, quod ex nostris accipere sumus minus digni., and confidence in their merits, and adoring their Images, cannot be iustified: for this manner of Deuotion hath no foundation expresse or infolded in Diuine Reuelation, and the Primitiue Church did not appoint or practise the same: And it encroa­cheth so neerely vpon the Office of Christ, our sole Redcemer, C Mediator, and Aduocate, that without expresse and manifest Precept, or approbation of the Holy Ghost Epi­phan. Haeres. 59. Graecè Latinae, 79. Etenim qua nam in Scripturae parte continetur? Quis vnquam Prophe­tarum, &c. Ambros. d. Sacram. Incarn. c. 9. Quod Legi non nego imo libenter vsurpo, quod non Legi vsur­pare non debeo. Athanas. d. Incarn. Christi. Neque loqui neque audire sustinemus, quod extraneum sit ab istis (Scripturis.) Cyril. Hierosol. Chat. 4. Mihi ne credas loquenti, nisi eorum quae praedicantur demonstratio­nes è Diuinis [...] acceperis., wee may not esteeme it lawfull.

The Doctrine of our Church, concerning Inuocation and Adoration of the blessed Trinitie; our accesse to God, by Sup­plications and Prayers, in the name of Iesus Christ; our de­pendance vpon the sole Merits and Satisfactions of our all­sufficient Redeemer, and Sauiour, haue Precept, Example, E Promise, Reasons, and Warrantie, deliuered in the expresse, manifest, and indubitate Word of God. Ioh. 14. 13, 14. & cap. 16.24. 1. Ioh. 2.1. Heb. 4. 15, 16. 1. Pet. 2.5. Heb. 13.15. Also wee haue certainetie of Faith, That Christ Iesus, our In­tercessor and Aduocate, hath distinct and perfect knowledge, [Page 289] particular and generall of our qualitie, state and actions. Heb. A 4.13. His office is, to make intercession for vs, Rom. 8.34. Heb. 7. 25. He inuiteth vs most louingly to come vnto him, Math. 11.28. Our heauenly Father alwayes heareth him, Iohn 11. 42. His compassion towards vs exceedeth the pietie of any creature, Ioh. 10. 11. & 15. 13. Heb. 4, 15. August. Con­fess. lib. 10. ca. 43. Quomodo nos a­masti pater bone, qui [...] tuo vnico non pepercisti, sed pro nobis impijs tradidisti [...]? quomodo nos a­masti, pro quibus ille [...] non rapi­nam arbitratus est esse equalis tibi, fa­ctus est subditus, vsque ad mortem crucis: vnus ille in mortuis liber, potestatem habens ponendi animam suam, & potestatem habens iterum su­mendi [...] pro nobis tibi victor & victima, & ideo victor quia victima: pro nobis tibi sacerdos & [...], & ideo sacerdos quia sacrificium, faciens tibi nos de seruis filios, de te nascendo, nobis seruiendo, merito mi­hi spcs valida in illo est, quod sanabis omnes languores meos, per eum qui scdet ad dexteram tuam, & te in­terpellat pro nobis alioquin desperarem. Wee may more safely, and with greater comfort, speake to our Sauiour, than to any Saint or Angell Aug. li. 2. d. visit. Infir. Tutius & iucundius loquor ad meum Iesum, quam ad aliquem sanctorum Spirituum.; the holy Spirit helpeth our infirmities, and teacheth vs to make intercession according to the will of God Aug. epist. 105. & sup. Psal. 118. Conc. 14. Greg. Mor. lib. 2. c. 30.. C Rom. 8.26, 27. Therefore our praying to God in the name of Christ onely, our supplication to the Father, to accept vs for B the sole merits of our Sauiour, is a most safe and faithfull de­uotion, and our assurance is grounded vpon the word of faith, and hauing such promises, we cannot be deceiued in our hope, 2. Tim. 2.13. Tit. 1. 2.

But on the contrarie, Romish inuocation, directed to Saints, Angells, and the blessed Virgin; their oblation of the merits and satisfaction of creatures, with many other branches of their holy seeming deuotion, haue neither precept, example, or pro­mise in the large booke of God, (notwithstanding the same booke is most abundant in teaching the dutie and forme of prayer.) And some of our best learned Aduersaries confesse, that the doctrine of inuocation of Saints, is neither expresly, nor infoldedly taught in holy Scripture Dom. Bannes. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. pag. D 170. Orationes ad sanctos esse faciendas, venerandas esse Imagines, neque etiam expressè, neque inuolutè Scripturae [...]..

Therefore his most excellent Maiestie, our Soueraigne Lord and King, to whose sacred person the Iesuit directeth his for­mer speech, may with vnspeakeable ioy and comfort, glorie that he is in this article, a defender and propugner of that faith which is taught from heauen by the holy Ghost: and Papisti­call inuocation is no plant growing in the Paradise [...]. c. Haer. li. 5. c. 20. Ab omni ligno paradisi es­cas manducabis [...], id est ab [...] Dominica man­ducate. of holy Scripture, by their owne confession, neither haue they any meanes infallible, to ascertaine themselues and others, that the same is a plant which the heauenly Father hath planted, or that E their deuotion in this kind is necessarie, profitable, or accepta­ble to God Hilar. d. Trin. li. 8. Quae dicimus nisi ab [...] discimus stulte dicimus..

IESVIT. A

In which question I will suppose without large and particular proofe (being able to prooue it by testimonies vndeniable, if neede be) That worship and inuocation of Saints, hath beene generally receiued in the whole Christi­an Church, at least euer since the dayes of Constantine. A thing so cleere, that Chemnitius doth write in this sort; Chemnitius Exam. Conc. Trid. part. 2. pa. 10 1. Nazian. Or. 18. in S. Cypr. Nissen. Or in S. Theodor. Basil. [...]. 20. in 40. Mart. Theod. de Graecorum. Affect. l. 8. Ambr. li. de vi­duis. Hierom. in vit. Hilar. & aduet. Vi­gilant. c. 3. Aug. li. 6. [...]. Donat. c. 1. Serauia in Defens­tract. de Diuers. pa. 389. Fulke in his Answ. to a coun­terfeit. pa. 46. Mag­deburg. Centur. 3. c. 4. Col. 83. Iren. li. 5. aduers. Haer. Most of the Fathers, as Nazianzen, Nissen, Basill, The­odoret, Ambrose, Hierome, Austin, &c. did not di­spute, B but auouch the soules of Martyrs and Saints to heare the petitions of those that prayed, they went often to the monuments of Martyrs, and inuocated Martyrs by name. And seeing these Fathers praysed and practised this cu­stome, as receiued from Ancestours, and as a matter of faith, condemning the contradictors thereof as Nouelists and Heretikes, to wit, Aerius and Vigilantius, as is con­fessed: I may further conclude, that that custome did not C then begin, but was come downe from the Apostles; which is confirmed by testimonie of the Magdeburgians, in ac­knowledging that in the Fathers next [...] the Apostoli­call times, were found, Non obscura vestigia Inuocati­onis Sanctorum, as appeareth by the testimonie of Saint Ireneus, tearming the [...] Virgin the aduocate of Eue, that is of her children.

ANSVVER. D

Fisher. Beeing able to prooue it by testimonies, vn­deniable. You presuppose that, which (notwithstanding your fa­cing) you will neuer bee able to prooue, to wit, That inno­cation of Saints, (according to the doctrine and practise of the late Roman Church) hath beene generally, and vniuersally re­ceiued as an article of faith or necessarie dutie, euer since the dayes of Constantine: neither hath Chemnitius whom you al­leadge, affirmed this, but rather said the contrarie. First, he saith Chemitius Ex­am. Trid. Conc pa. 3. pa. 195. In primi­tiua Ecclesia, [...] ad annos [...] post Chri­stum natum, [...] de [...] patrocinijs, [...], meritis ope, auxilio, & inuocatione Sanctorum in coelis, [...] fuit: & [...] fuit sicut oftendimus, ratio venerationis Sanctorum, quam quae postea inuecta est., That in the Primitiue Church, vntill two hundred years after Christ, this doctrine and practise was vtterly vnknowne. Secondly, he affirmeth, that about the yeare 240. some seedes E of this doctrine began to be sowne in the Church by Origen Idem. Illis [...], & ab illo authore circa annum Domini 240. Spargi caeperunt, Seminaria inuo­cationis Sanctorum..

[Page 291] Thirdly, He saith expresly Jbid. per an­nos à nato Christo 350. & amplius, Ecclesia Inuocatio­nem Sanctorum in publica praxi Igno­rauit., that for three hundred and fif­tie yeeres and vpward, the publike practise of Inuocation was vnknowne in the Church: And then about the yeere 370, it began to be spoken of in publicke assemblies, by Basil, Nyssen, and Nazianzen, vpon occasion of their Panegyricall Orations Ibid. Tandem circa annum Domini 370. per Basilium, [...], & Nazianzenum, in publicos Ecclesiae conuentus occasione Orationum Panegyricarum inuehi caepit eodem tempore cum ab ijsdem authoribus Monachatus ex AEgypto & Syria in Graeciam introduceretur..

h Ibid. Atque hactenus Inuocatio Sanctorum, in priuatis preculis regnauit, [...] vero hic Gregorius apud Latinos in public as Ecclesiae supplicationes quas Graeco vocabulo [...] vocant, primus intrusisse scri­bitur. Apud Graecos enim Petrus Gnapheus idem antea tentauit sicut supra notauimus. Fourthly, He addeth, Ibid. Conside­randum autem est in Historia illorum temporū quod non vbique & ab omni­bus, pro certis, ve­ris, & Catholicis dogmatibus recep­tae fuerint Panegy­ricae illo declama­tiones. That notwithstanding these Orati­ons, it was not generally and vniuersally receiued in those B times, but both doubted of, and also reprooued and condem­ned by some Ibid. Quia ve­ro Catholicum hoc est sicut Lyrinensis non male definit quod semper, quod vbique & ab omni­bus fidelibus, ex Scriptura constan­ter receptum fuit, addenda est & haec obseruatio, quod non dubitatū tan­tum de Inuocatione Sanctorum fuit istis temporibus, cum ex priuatis vulgi & muliercularum deuotionibus in Ecclesiam inciperet introduci: sed diserte & quidem magno zelo reprehensa, & in Catalogum haereseon relata fuit ab Epiphanio, quiijsdem firme temporibus vixit.: and about the 400. yeere, Saint Chrysostome interposed, and laboured to reduce people to the antient forme of Inuocation Ibid. Cumque illis temporibus, [...] Sancto­rum quidam assererent, quidam reprehenderent, quidam vero de ea dubitarent, non inutilis erit obseruatio quo­modo Chrysostomus suam sententiam inter posuerit.. And proceeding in his Historicall Narration, he sheweth out of Nicephorus, lib. 15. cap. 28. that Petrus Gna­pheus Ibid. Et memorabile est, ac ad perpetuam rei memori­am dignū obseruatione, quod Petrus [...], qui in quinta vniuersali Synodo, vt Haereticus damnatus fuit, pri­mus Author & inuentor fuit miscendae Inuocationis Sanctorum, inter publicas Ecclesiae preces. Nicephorus l. 15. D c. 28. Et vt in omni praecatione omni, Dei genetrix nominaretur, & diuinum nomen eius inuocaretur., Anno 470 (condemned by the first vniuersall Synode, of Heresie) was the first Author among the Grecians, of mix­ing intercessions to the Virgin Marie with diuine Prayers. Hee affirmeth also, that in Saint Augustines dayes Ibid. pa. 212., Inuocation of Saints was not vsed in the common Seruice of the West C Church. And descending to the 600. yeeres, he saith, Inuoca­tion of Saints among the Latines, was not brought into the publicke Seruice and Letanies of the Church, vntill the dayes of Pope Gregorie the first.

Lastly, the forme and manner of Saintly Inuocation, in the 600 yeere, differed extreamely from that which was vsed by Papals in latter times: and this is confirmed by Chemnitius Ib. From the pag. 145. vnto pag. 173. O Francisce lux so­laris, [...] sin­gularis iam cum Christo gloriaris, in choro caelestium. Tu sis nobis vitae via, tu pro nobis semper pia. Prode Christo stygmata, &c. E Item. Salue imperatrix gloriosissima peccatricis animae meae spes tutissima Deigenetrix Virgo Maria. Tu post Deū praecipuū & maximum es refugium & gaudium. Item. O Sancta Maria, & omnes sancti & electi Dei, nunc & in hora mortis meae, mihi misero succurite, & Dominum Deum nostrum, vestris meritis & precibus mihi propicium facite. Item. Sancta Maria, perpetua Virgo virginum, mater misericordiae, mater gratiae, spes omniū desolatorū, consolatrix omnium desperantium: O miseratrix miserorum, dulcis consolatio afflictorum, ac mater misericordiarum, deso­latorū pijssima consolatrix, & in omni necessitate pupillorū promota nutrix: Exaudi praeces meas, & quia in di­uersis malis & angustijs, propter peccata mea positus sum, [...] ad quem fugiam, nisi ad te Dominam meam, &c., setting downe verbatim, many Collects and formes of deuo­tion, vsed in latter dayes, which were antiently vnheard of.

[Page 292] Secondly, The Fathers which you cite in your Margine, to A prooue the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints and Martyrs, to haue beene a matter of faith, from the dayes of Constantine, are Gregorie Nyssen, S t. Basil, Theodorit, S t. Ambrose, S t. Hierom, and S t. Augustine: but hauing perused the places, I finde not that these Fathers either deliuered this Doctrine, as matter of Ca­tholicke Faith, or affirme the Practise thereof to haue beene necessarie and vniuersall; or that they spake of such Wor­ship and Inuocation of Saints, as is practised in the seruice of your Church. But as places may bee noted in some Fathers, touching inuocation of Saints deceased; or which argue, that B they requested Saints to assist them with their Prayers, at least in generall, and so farre foorth as they had knowledge of their necessities: So likewise other Sentences are found in their wri­tings, maintaining the sole Inuocation of God by Christ, and condemning Inuocation of Angels and Saints deceased, accor­ding to the manner now vsed in the Romane Church. Theoderit vpon the Colossians Theod. sup. Col. 2. Synodus quae conuenit Laodi­ceae, quae est Phry­giae metropolis, le­ge prohibuit, ne precarentur Ange­los: & in hodier­num vsque diem, li­cet videre apud il­los, & eorum finiti­mos, oratoria sancti Michaelis. Illi ergo hoc consulebant v­ti (que) humilitate v­tentes, dicentes, vniuersorū Deum, nec cerni, nec com­prehendi, nec ad [...] posse perueniri & oportere per Angelos diuinam sibi beneuolentiam conciliare., cap. 2. condemneth worshipping and Inuocation of Angels. S t. Ambrose saith, Ambr. d. obit. Theo­dos. D Id. d. Interpellat. l. 3. c. 12. Tu portio mea es, abundas mihi ad omnia, nihil quaesiui aliunde, nisi vt te par­tem haberem nulli me caelesti vt Gentiles, subdidi Creaturae. Hieron. in. Prouerb. cap. 2. Tu solus Dominus in­uocandus es, &c. Thou Lord onely art to bee inuocated. S t. Hierom, Nullum inuocare, id est, in nos orando vocare nisi Deum de­bemus: C We ought to inuocate, that is, by Prayer to call into vs none but God. And in another place, Hier. ad Heliodor. Ep. 3. c. 1. Quicquid dixero quia ille non audit mutum videtur. Ib. c. 10. Foelix Nepotianus qui haec non videt haec non audit. Whatsoeuer I shall vtter seemeth dumbe, because hee (Nepotian) being defunct, heareth me not. S t. Augustine, Non sit nobis Religio cultus hominum mortuorum: Let not the worship of persons defunct be our Religion. Saint Athanasius, Athanas. c. Arrian. Orat. 4. Origen. c. Celsum. l. 8. p. 523. Solus adorandus est Deus optimus maxi­mus: Soli praeces offerendae vnigenito Dei verbo, primogenito craturae totius: Qui vt Pontifex eas ad Deum suum, & nostrum perferat, & Patrem suum, atque omnium iuxta verbum eius viuentium. Nunguam quispiam precaretur aliquid accipere a Pa­tre & Angelis, vel ab vllis rebus creatis: No man would euer pray to receiue any [...] from the Father, and from the Angels, or from any other creature.

Thirdly, That which the Iesuit affirmeth concerning Aerius and Vigilantius, is false: for neither of these is ranked among Heretickes, by Philastrius, Epiphanius, S t. Augustine, or by any of the antient Fathers, because they denied Inuocation of E Saints departed; and Popish Prateolus himselfe, maketh not this doctrine any of Aerius his errours; and treating of Vigilantius, he produceth onely Lindanus and Hosius (two most partiall Pon­tificians) affirming him to haue beene condemned of heresie for Epiphan. Haeres. 77. Aug. d. Haer. haeres. 53. this cause. Wherefore our Aduersarie prooueth himselfe a [Page 293] weake Antiquarie, when he affirmeth that Aerius and Vigilan­tius, A were condemned of heresie, because they denyed Inuoca­tion of Saints deceased.

Fourthly, The Magdeburgians, which in the third Centurie obserue, Non obscura vestigia, &c, some not very obscure tra­ces, or footsteps, in the writings of the Doctors of this age, concerning Inuocation of Saints, speake of the least degree and kind of Inuocation, to wit, Compellation; and besides, they probably suspect, that suppositious Sentences haue beene in­serted into the Bookes of antient Fathers Cent. 4. c. 4. 297. Hinc apparet, malignum spiritum tantorum virorum Scriptis plurima inseruisse, &c. Sicut autem supra monuimus, apparet B [...] esse deprauata, & supposita in istorum doctorum Scriptis..

Lastly, Ireneus Iren. li. 5. c. 19. Manifeste ita (que) in sua propria venien­te Domino, & sua propria cum baiu­lante conditione, quae baiulatur ab ipso, & recapitula­tionem eius quae in ligno fuit inobedi­entiae, per eam quae in ligno est inobe­dientiam faciente, & seductione illa [...], qua seducta est male illa quae iam viro destinata erat: virgo Eua per veritatem Euangelizata est bene ab Angelo iam sub viro virgo Maria. Quemadmodum enim illa per Angelicum Sermonem seducta est, vt effugeret Deum praeuaricata verbum eius, ita & haec per Angelicum [...] Euangelizata est, vt portaret Deum, obediens eius verbo. Et sicut illa seducta est vt effugeret Doum, fic haec suasa est obedire Deo, vti virginis Euae, [...] Maria, fieret Aduocata. stileth the Virgin Marie, The Aduocate of Euah, not in regard of her Intercession for Euah and her chil­dren, after her decease and departure out of the world; but be­cause of that which she performed, in beleeuing and obeying the heauenly message which the Angel Gabriel brought vnto her, Luke 1.38. for hereby she became a blessed Instrument of conceiuing and bearing Christ Iesus, and by this obedience the blessed seed was brought into the world, by her, whereby the fall of Euah and her children was repaired. And thus shee was C the Aduocate or Comforter of In Graeco textu proculdubio, fuit nomen [...], quod & Aduocatam & consolatorem significat, vt sit sensus. Quemad. Eua generi hu­mano fuit in exitium, ita B. Virginem eidem fuisse in solatium, quatenus Christum omnis solatij [...] Virgi­nali suo vtero concepit. Vide Gallas. Not. in Iren. pa. 399. Euah and her children, by bea­ring Christ; and not because she was inuocated, as a Mediator, after her death by Euahs children.

IESVIT. D

Neither can Protestants denie this to haue beene the Do­ctrine of the Fathers, but seeke to discredit them, as if they had been various, vncertaine, contradictorious in this point. Magdeburg. Cent. 4. cap. 4. But seeing Antiquitie, that hath perused their workes now more than 1300 yeeres, neuer noted such contradictions in them, Christian wisedome and charitie will neuer be so per­suaded E of the Fathers by Protestants, specially their Allega­tions being such as may easily be explicated, so as they make nothing at all against this Catholicke Custome.

ANSVVER. A

Protestants maintaine, that inuocation of Saints can be no Article of Faith, although it were manifest, that some Fathers liuing since, or before the daies of Constantine, had beleeued or practised the same; for euery Article of Christian Faith must be grounded vpon diuine Reuelation Aquin. Com. sup. Ioh. 21. Lect. 6. Notandum autem quod cum multi scriberent de Canonica veritate, haec est differentia, quod illi qui scripserunt canonicam Scripturam sicut Euangelistae & Apostoli & alij huiusmodi, ita constantèr eam asserunt quod nihil du­bitandum B relinquunt, & ideò dicit & scimus, quià verum est testimonium eius, & Gal. 1.8. Si quis Euangelizauc­rit, &c. cuius ratio est, quià sola Canonica Scriptura est regula fidei. Aug. ep. 48. Audi dicit Dominus, non dicit Rogatus, aut Donatus, aut Vincentius, aut Hilar. aut Ambros. aut August. sed dicit Dominus. Id. d. vnit. Eccles. cap. 5. Sunt certilibri Dominici, quorum authoritati vtriquè consentimus, vtriquè credimus, vtriquè seruimus, ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam, ibi discutiamus causam nostram. Id. contr. Max. Arian. lib 3. cap. 13. Nec ego Nicaenum, nec tu debes Arimense tanquam praeiudicaturus proferre Concilium, nec ego huius authoritate, nec tu illius de­tineris. Scripturarum authoritatious non quorumcunquè proprijs, sed vtrisquè communibus testibus, res cum re, causa cum causa, ratio cum ratione concertet, vtriquè tanti ponderis molibus cedamus..

But all opinions of the Fathers, are not diuine Reuelation, and the holy Fathers do not challenge to themselues infallibi­litie of iudgement, neither do our Aduersaries yeeld the same vnto them Canis. d. Maria. Deip. lib. 1. cap. 5. C Quamquam minus attinet veteres excusare Scriptores, quire parum considerata, & in nullam adhuc disputatio­nem adducta, suam dicere sententiam libere potuerunt, nullam verò firmam & necessariam credendi regulam alijs hac in re, praescribere aut voluerunt aut debuerunt: versabantur illi in alijs de fide quaestionibus. Maldon. in Ioh. ca. 2. v. 4. Inter veteres Auctores paucos admodum inuenio qui non aut apertè dieunt, aut obscurè significent, aliquam culpam aut errorem certè fuisse quod filium ad faciendum miraculum in citauerit, si non ob aliud, cer­tè quià [...] & antè tempus id fecit. Can. loc. lib. 7. cap. 3. Alia claritas Mathei, alia Hieronimi, alia Esaiae, alia Ambrosij, atquè auctores Canonici vt superni coelestes [...] perpetuam stabilemquè constantiam seruant, reliqui verò Scriptores sancti inferiores & humani sunt, deficiuntquè interdum, ac monstrum quandoquè pariunt praeter conuenientem ordinem institutumquè naturae..

Therefore a surer foundation must be laid to proue Adora­tion, and Inuocation of Saints to be a necessarie duetie, than a D few scattered opinatiue sentences of Ecclesiasticall writers.

Neuerthelesse, Protestants are able to giue satisfaction con­cerning the iudgement of Antiquitie in this point. And we haue prooued that the eldest Fathers for those ages, in which Ege­sippus saith, The Church continued a Virgin Euseb. Hist. Eccles. li. 3. ca. 28., taught no such Doctrine.

Secondly, no generall Councel, nor yet any particular Coun­cell confirmed by a generall, did euer authorise or decree inuo­cation of Saints, as it is now maintained by Papals, to haue beene a necessarie duetie or practise. E

Thirdly, there be sundrie Principles and other passages in the Bookes of the Fathers, by which this doctrine may be con­futed.

IESVIT. A

For all they say in this kind is reduced to these fiue heads: First, That Saints are not inuocated Rom. 10. cap. 14. Ambros. d. Obitu. Theodos. by Faith, as authors of the benefits we craue.

ANSWER.

Our Aduersarie hath collected fiue Expositions to elude such testimonies as we produce out of antiquitie. First, where­as B many Fathers treading in the steps of holy Scripture, affirme that religious prayer is a proper worship belonging to the sa­cred Trinitie; and by this argument they conclude against the Arians and Macedonians, that Christ Iesus and the holy Ghost are verie God, because Christians beleeue in them, and pray vnto them Tertul. d. Trin. ca. 14. Si homo tan­tummodò [...], quomodò adest v­biquè inuocatus, cú haec hominis na­tura non sit, sed Dei, vt adesse om­ni loco possit? Si homo tantummo­dò [...], cur ho­mo in orationibus Mediator inuoca­tur? cum inuocatio hominis ad praestandum salutem inefficax iudicetur. Si homo tantummodò Chtistus, cur spes in illum ponitur? cum spes in homine maledicta referatur. Basil. d. Spir. Sanct. c. 22. Spiritum sanctum esse [...] Deum probat ex eo, quià piorum praeces vbiquè locorum exaudit. Orig. in Epist. ad Rom. ca. 10. Si inuo­care Domini nomen, & adorare Deum, vnum atquè idem est, sicut inuocatur Christus & adorandus est Christus, & sicut [...] Deo patri primo omnium orationes, ita & Domino Iesu Christo: & sicut offerrimus postula­tiones Patri, ità offerrimus postulationes & Filio. Et sicut offerrimus [...] actiones Deo, ità gratias offerri­mus Saluatori.. The Iesuit telleth vs, that the Fathers intend on­ly, that we may not inuocate creatures by faith, as authors of the benefits we craue. But if this glosse or solution be suffici­ent, then the Argument of the Fathers concludeth not against the Arians, that Christ is God, because he is inuocated Athanas. c. Arian. Orat. 2. in fine. Sanctos non à Creato postulare, vt auxiliator sit, &c. D pag. 164., for C the Arian vsing the Iesuits distinction, may replie, That Christ is inuocated as a Mediator, and as the sonne of God by adop­tion, but not as verie God, and the prime Author of the bene­fits which Christian people craue.

IESVIT.

Seconly, that Angels are not to be honoured Origen. li. 5. contr. Celsum. & li. 8. circà finem. as Gods, nor by sacrifices in the Heathenish manner.

ANSWER.

This answer is vnsufficient; for the Fathers, not only when E they answer Heathens, but when they instruct Christians, deli­uer the like speeches. And how appeareth it, that Christians were so rude in those ages, as to Imagine, that Angels were Gods? or that sacrifices after the Pagan manner, were due to them?

IESVIT. A

Thirdly, the Priest doth not inuocate Saints by direct prayer in the Liturgie of the Masse, which being a Sacri­fice, the deuotion thereof is to be directed Aug. lib. 22. d. Ci­uit. c. 10. Conc. Car­thag. 3. cap. 23. to God only.

ANSVVER.

Papists inuocate Saints in the Liturgie of their Masse, which the Antients did not Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, li. 22. ca. 10. Ad quod Sacrificium, sicut homines Dei, qui mundum in e­ius confessione vi­cerunt, suo loco & ordine nominātur, non tamé à Sacer­dote qui sacrificat inuocantur.: and the Iesuit perceiuing this, endeauo­reth B to cloud the matter, saying, The Priest doth not inuocate Saints by direct prayer, &c. But S. Augustines words exclude all inuocation of Saints, both direct and indirect in the admini­stration of the Eucharist, saying, At which sacrifice the Mar­tyres are named in their place and order, as men of God, which haue ouercome the world in the confession of him: but yet notwithstanding, they are not inuocated by the Priest which sacrificeth. S. Augustine in these words, saith expressely, That Martyres were named at the Communion Table, but not inuocated.

IESVIT. C

Fourthly, that the deceased do not know what is done in this world, to wit, by their naturall August. li. d. Cura pro mortuis, ca. 16. forces.

ANSVVER.

Neither did they hold as an infallible truth, that the Saints deceased, do vnderstand by reuelation, the affaires and qualities of the liuing, but say only that the same is possible Aug. de Cur. pro Mort. c. 15. Pos­sunt etiam spiritus mortuorum aliqua quae hic aguntur, quae [...] est cos nosse, & quae necessariū non est cos non nosse, non solum [...] vel praesentia, verum [...] futura spiritu Dei reuelante cognoscere.. And S. Augustine dares not define, whether the Martyres heare our D prayers or not, or pray in particular for the liuing, but affir­meth, That it may be, that they pray onely in generall, and that God himselfe, by the ministerie of Angels, effecteth those merueiles, which were performed at their tombes Ib. c. 16. Quanquam ista questio vires in­telligentiae meae vincat, &c. Res haec est altior quam vt à me possit attingi, &c. Definere non audio. Ib. An ipsi in locis suo merito [...] ab omni mortalium conuersatione remotis, & tamen generalistèr orantibus, sicut nos oramus pro mortuis, quibus vtiquè non praesentamur, nec vbi sint, vel quid agant scimus.. And S. Hieroms place, alledged formerly, is generall.

IESVIT. E

Fiftly, speaking vnto some deceased persons, they make an If Naz. Or. 3. in Iu­lian., whether they heare them, because they speake vnto [Page 297] such as they know not certainely to be Saints, as may A be cleerely shewed in particulars, if need be.

ANSWER.

They knew they were Saints vpon better grounds than Pa­pists know Thomas Becket, Dominicke, Francis, Ignatius Loiola, Christopher, George, Catherine, &c. to be Saints. And did they not reckon Constantine to be in ioy and glorie with Christ? yet Greg. Naz. Or. 1. [...] Iulian. Greg. Nazianzene vsing an Apostrophe to him, saith: [...], B Heare O thou spirit of great Con­stantine, if thou hast any sence or notion of these things. And if holy persons deceased, are not knowne to be Saints, vntill they be canonized by Popes, the antient Fathers could not inuocate Saints by Faith, because the canonizing of Saints by Popes is of a latter hatch Bellar. d. sanct. Beatit. li. 1. ca. 8. Pri­mus Pontifex qui Sanctos legatur ca­nonizasse videtur fuisse, Leo Papa, 3., and being a matter of fact, some Papists Glossa. c. 1. d. Reliq. & ven. Sanctorum in Sexto. In verb. sedis Apostolicae. Aug. Tri­umph. d. Pot. Eccles. q. 14. ar. 4. Canus. loc. li. 5. cap. 5. In canonizatione Sactorum, fidem Ecclesiae detrahere, sine C fidei discrimine possumus. Compertum est autem eam rem ad mores spectare, errareigitur Ecclesia in morum iuditio potest. Illud verò Thomae, & Antonini testimonio comprobatur, qui non aiunt certò & firmiter, sed pie credendum esse Ecclesiam in re huiusmodi non errate. Nam quod absolutè possit illa ratio confirmat, quod in id genus iuditijs, Ecclesia, hominum eorum testimonijs innititur, qui & fallere & falli possunt. question the Popes Iudgement, whether it be infallible or not, in canonizing of Saints.

IESVIT.

This Truth supposed, I cannot but conceiue Hope, that your Maiestie professing so much loue of the first Primi­tiue ages, may receiue satisfaction about this custome, the causes of Protestants dislike being weake, and not to be op­posed D against the strength of so long continued an autho­ritie, as J shall endeauour to demonstrate in their eight vsuall exceptions.

ANSVVER.

The foundation of your structure is dubious, and in it selfe ouer weake, to carrie your heauie vast roofe. For custome and long continued practise of men, in ciuile affaires, may be of force Tertul. d. Cor. Mil. c. 4. Consuctu­do in ciuilibus [...] pro lege suscipitur.; but in matters of Faith, although it may sometimes E be an hand-maid, yet it can neuer be a Principle or foundati­on. It is not iust, saith S. Basil Basil. cp. 80. Non, est iustum consuetudinem legem ac regulam sacere rectae Doctrinae. Scriptura [...] inspirata Iudex [...]., to make custome a law, and rule of [Page 298] right Doctrine, the holy Scripture giuen by diuine inspiration, must be A appointed Iudge. And Saint Cyprian Cyprian. Epist. 63. Neque homi­nis consuetudinem sequi oportet, sed Dei veritatem: cum per Isaiam Deus lo­quatur & dicat, sine causa autem colunt me, mandata & doctrinas hominum docentes. Hier. in Ierem. ca. 9. Nec parentum nec Maiorum sequendus est error, sed authoritas Seripturarum ac Dei docentis imperium. Clem. Alex. [...]. At inquitis, non est fas nobis euertere consuetudinem traditam à patribus, &c. Mala con­suetudo post excessum ex hac vita, vanam poenitentiam affert cum supplicio. Ib. Fugiamus ergo consuetudinem, fugiamus tanquam scopulum difficilem, aut charibdis minas: suffocat homines à veritate auertit, abducit à vita, est barathrum, est malum ventilabrum consuetudo. B, Wee may not follow the cu­stome of men, but the veritie of God, because the Lord saith by his Prophet, In vaine doe they worship me, teaching the Precepts and Do­ctrines of men.

IESVIT. §. 4. Inuocation of Saints not to be disliked, be­cause not expressed in Scripture.

ANd first J must satisfie the transcendentall cause of C their dislike, which is, That Worship and Jnuocation of Saints deceased, is no where expresly set downe in Scripture; without expesse warrant whereof, nothing may lawfully bee done that belongs to Religion. But this, though carrying a shew of deuotion, in the conceit of com­mon people, is altogether vnworthie of the erudition of Luther. Serm. d. Cruce: sine expres­so Dei mandato. any learned Protestant: for howsoeuer in the beginning of their separation, they did crie for expresse Scripture, ex­presse D commands of the written Word; yet now they are so gone from that Principle, as they are exceeding angrie with vs, that we should thinke that any of theirs were at any Wotton, in his Try­all. D. Iohn White in his Defence. p. 288. time broachers of such an absurditie; wherefore in their written Bookes (what they teach in Pulpits I know not) they disclaime from expresse Scripture, and thinke it a suf­ficient D. Field of the Church. lib. 4. warrant of a Christan Custome, that the same bee grounded on Scripture, that is, may bee deduced by good E Discourse from Truths reuealed therein, or bee prooued consonant vnto the rules and principles thereof: according to which ample extent of Scriptures, vnto things deducible from them, or consonant vnto them, there is no Catholicke [Page 299] Custome that hath not warrant in Gods word, as wee are A able to shew.

ANSWER.

One principall argument which Protestants make against inuocation of Saints, is, that this seruice and deuotion, hath no foundation in the holy Scripture Chrys. in Gen. Hom. 13. Non cre­dere hijs, quae in Diuina scriptura continentur, sed alia quaedam ex propria sententia in ferre, [...] periculi [...] qui talia audiunt. Gregor. mor. li. 18. c. 14. Si vere loqui desiderant inde sumere debent B quid loquantur. Aug. d. Trinit. li. 3. c. 11. Extat authoritas diuinatum scripturarum vnde mens nostra deuiare non debet. Cyril. chat. 4. mihi ne credas loquenti, nisi [...] quae praedicantur demonstrationes è diuinis scrip­turis accepetis..

To this the Iesuit an swereth. First, It is vnworthy the eruditi­on of any learned Protestant, &c. But that which was worthy in the Fathers, cannot be vnworthy in vs. Epiphanius argueth in this manner Epiph. c. Colli­rid Haer. 59. siue 79.. [...], What Scripture did euer re­quire this? Which of the Prophets did euer permit a man, much lesse anie woman to be adored. S. Hierome Hier. c. Hel­uid. vt haec quae scripta sunt non negamus, ita [...] quae nō sunt scrip­ta renuimus: Na­tum Deum esse de virgine credemus, quia legimus, Ma­riam nupsisse post partum non cre­dimus, quia non legimus., As we deny nothing that is C written, so we refuse things which are vnwritten: we beleeue God to haue beene borne of a Virgin, because we reade it: we beleeue not Ma­ry, to haue liued a wedded woman after her childbirth, because we doe not reade this. S. Ambrose, How can we vse those things which wee find not in holy Scripture Ambros. quae in Scripturis sanctis non reperimus ea D quo modo vsurpa­re possumus. offic. li. 1. c. 23.? A learned Papist saith Discip. d. Temp. Serm. 23. c Bernhard. [...] Christum mendicasse.: Because it is not read in Scripture, That Christ during the time of his preaching, was a Mendicant, therefore it followeth, that he did not begge. The sequele (saith the Authour) is good: Quia in sacra Scriptura, tenet locus ab authoritate negatiue, because in holy Scripiure, the argu­ment which concludeth negatiuely from authoritie, is of force.

Secondly, the Iesuit addeth, that Protestants are varied from their first doctrine concerning expresse Scripture, &c. But he must not ranke men exorbitant, such as are headie op­posers, and rigide exceptors against Ecclesiasticall gouern­ment and ceremonies, in the number of well aduised Prote­stants. Those men indeed haue forged in their owne braines an axiome to serue their owne turne, to wit, That Christians must E haue speciall ground out of Scripture for all circumstantiall actions and decencies vsed in diuine worship. These we refute, or better instruct, to bring them into the middle way: and wee teach as followeth, First, that nothing is to be receiued as a part of Catholike faith, nor yet to be imposed in religion, as a [Page 300] dutie immediately commanded by God, which is expresly or A deriuatiuely contained in holy Scripture.

Secondly, outward ceremonies and things adiaphorous haue generall warrant in the Scripture in the doctrine of Christian libertie, and in the doctrine of the authoritie of the Church. And concerning things adiaphorous, it is sufficient to make them lawfull, that they are consonant vnto the generall rules and principles of Scripture Aug. Ep. 118. Quod neque con­tra fidem, neque contra bonos mo­res iniungitur, in­differenter est ha­bendum, & pro [...] inter quos viuitur societate seruandum est.. But the Romish doctrine of in­uocation of Saints, and offering their merits vnto God, Gabriel. in Can. Miss. lect. 30. Non frustra imploramus sanctos, quos non vt Creatores gratiae, siue beatificatores inuocamus: sed vt mediatores, quorum meritis & intuitu, nobis Deus confert, quae ex nostris accipere minus digni sumus. &c. are imposed by them as matters of faith, and as a seruice imme­diately appointed by Christ and his Apostles; and they which B refuse this worship, are condemned as Heretikes, with a solemne Anathema. Also the said worship is made meritorious and sa­tisfactorie, yea many times preferred Salmeron. Sup. 1. Tim. 2. Disp. 7. Ex quo videtur, quod oratio fusa per Sanctos, melior sit, quia secum continet duplicem actum. Ecclesia quae Christi spiritum habet, frequentissime per sanctos recurrit ad Deum, rarius per se ad De­um accedit. Biel. in. Can. Miss. lect. 30. Peccatoribus singularis est consolatio, quod ad sanctorum inuocatio­nem, quandoque magis animantur quam iudicis. C before that which hath expresse warrant in Gods vndoubted word.

IESVIT.

This onely we require, that ignorant people bee not Iudges of such inferences; an office so farre aboue their capacities, as I am persuaded no vnlearned man that hath in him any sparke of humilitie, or any mediocritie of Iudgement, will vndertake it: for no man is competent to iudge assuredly of arguments by deduction from Scripture, D that hath not exact skill, as well of Scripture to know the false sence from the true, as of Logicke to distinguish Syllo­gismes from Paralogismes, being able to giue sentence of the truth, of Principles by the one, and of the inferences by the other; a thing so hard, as euen learned Diuines doe much suspect their owne sufficiencie to iudge of Deductions, and dare not absolutely pronounce their sentence, but referre [...] omnes gē ­tes, &c. & ecce ego vobiscum sum, &c. Math. 28.20. Ioh. 14. 16. c. 16.13. the same to definitions of authoritie: which besides skill E of Scripture and Logicke, hath the promise of Gods per­petuall assistance, in teaching the Christian Church:

ANSWER. A

We are farre from appointing ignorant persons to be Iudges of that, which exceedeth their modell and skill Greg. Naz. o­rat. 1. Non cuius­uis est doctrinam de Deo [...], &c. Sicutd ebi­les oculos in solis radios conuerti peticulo non [...], &c., 1. Cor. 12. 29. and the tractation of matters, obscure and difficile, must be referred to the iuditious and learned Aug. sup. Psal. 103. Quicunque infirmi non pos­sunt ascendere in hoc coelum, id est ad intellectū scrip­turarum per nubes ascendunt. Greg. mor. li. 16. c. 24. Quasi quidam in Ecclesia Senatores sunt viri doctiores.. But the promise of Christ to assist his Ministers, in teaching and gouerning their flocke, belongeth to other Pastours, as well as to the Romane Bishop and his associates; to whom we may say as S. Hierome Hier. ad Pammach. An tu solus Ecclesia es, & qui te [...] a Christo excluditur, tibi soli licet Eccle­siae iura calcare, tu quicquid feceris norma doctrinae est? B doth in another case: Are you alone the Church, and is euery one excluded from Christ, which offendeth you? may you betrample the right of the Church, and yet whatsoeuer you doe, it must be a rule of Doctrine?

IESVIT.

Wherefore if Protestants will binde vs to bring ex­presse C Scripture for the worship of Images, adoration of the Sacrament, inuocation of Saints; they must themselues likewise be bound to bring expresse Scripture against Ana­baptists, for Christening of infants, for their keeping of the Sunday in lieu of the antient Sabbaoth day, for their de­dicating of dayes in memorie of the Apostles, with religious solemnitie, for the crosse in Baptisme, and other such things D obserued in their Religion, not expressed in Scripture. And if deduction from Scripture, or consonancie therewith, be sufficient to warrant these customes, Why should they mi­slike the worship and inuocation of Saints; for which (be­sides the iudgement of the most flourishing and learned an­tiquitie that euer was since the Apostles dayes, to wit, the Chemnitius vbi supra. Fathers of the fourth age confessedly consenting with vs) we bring more cleare warrant from scripture, than they can bring for the before mentioned obseruation, of them re­ligiously E kept?

ANSWER. A

If you will maintaine Inuocation of Saints, as a mat­ter of faith, or necessarie dutie, appointed immediately by God, you must confirme the same, either by expresse Scrip­ture, or by arguments out of the Scripture, orby some o­ther reuelation which is infallibly diuine, besides the Scrip­ture Aquin. p. 1. q. 1. ar. 8. Innititur fi­des nostra, Reuela­tioni Apostolis & Prophetis factae, qui canonicos li­bros scripserunt, non autē Reuela­tioni si qua fuit ali­is doctoribus facta.. But if you vrge the same, onely as a thing adiapho­rous, it is sufficient to make the practise lawfull, if it be not re­pugnant B to the Scripture. But this latter imposeth no necessi­tie vpon other Churches which haue libertie to prescribe their owne adiaphorous rights.

The instances which you present vnto vs, of infants Bap­tisme, keeping Sunday in liew of the legall Sabboath, and the figne of the Crosse in Baptisme, arguing from them, that some things are of necessarie obseruation, and practised by our selues without expresse Scripture to warrant them, are answered as before.

First, baptinng of infants is deduced euidently from the C Scriptures, by the confession of your learned Cardinall Bellarmin. d. Bapt. li. 1. c. 9. Col­ligitur satis aperte ex scriptura. Ibid. Deducitur euidenter ex Scripturis..

Secondly, there is expresse mention of the Lords day, and of the religious obseruing thereof in the text of the new Testa­ment, Act. 20.7. 1. Cor. 16.2. And the Primitiue Church Ignat. Epist. ad Magnes. Iust. Mart. Apolog. 2. Orig. in Exod. Hom. 7. [...]. Serm. 61 immediately succeeding the Apostles, testifieth expresly, the obseruation of this day, to haue beene grounded vpon Apo­stolicall institution. But Romish inuocation of Saints, wan­teth the former of these, totally, and Papists can hardly name D one authenticall Authour of the first 500 yeare, which affir­meth that inuocation of Saints is a diuine or Apostolicall tra­dition.

Thirdly, the signe of the Crosse in Baptisme, is an antient ceremonie, but yet adiaphorous, and therefore expresse Scrip­ture is not necessarie to warrant the vse of it. But your inuoca­tion of Saints and Image worship, are made matters of faith, and for the practise, so inuiolable, that the liuing Saints and Images of God, must be destroyed and consumed in the topheth of your inquisition, if they will not bend and bow the knee ac­cording E to your tradition.

IESVIT. § 2. A Knowledge of Prayers made to them com­municable, and communicated vnto Saints.

THe second cause why Protestants dislike praying to B Saints, is, for that they thinke by teaching that Saints heare our Petitions, we attribute vnto them know­ledge proper to God onely: for Saints cannot know all Prayers made to them, without seeing at once what is done in euery part of the world, nor know the sincere deuotion wherewith they are done, without seeing the secret affe­ctions of mens hearts: but to know what is done in all parts of the world, and the secrets of hearts is knowledge C proper to God.

Therfore we cannot teach that they heare our Petitions, without attributing to them knowledge proper to God. To this exception, answere is made, That knowledge proper to God is of two kinds, the one so proper, as it is altogether incommnnicable with any creature; and such is the com­prehension of his diuine essence. The second is proper so, that naturally creatures are not capeable thereof, yet the same may be imparted vnto them by supernaturall light, D eleuating them to a high and diuine state, aboue the pos­sibilitie of nature. In this kinde is the vision of the diuine essence, face to face, which being granted vnto Saints, sight of the inferiour world, and of the secrets of hearts, is without cause reputed incommunicable with them, ac­cording to the saying of Saint Prosper, Nothing is so se­cret, De vita contem­plat. l. 5. c. 4. as the knowledge thereof may bee denyed vnto the perfectly Blessed, their seeing God with pure vnderstan­ding, E being without comparison a thing more excellent: Thus Saint Prosper, whose Argument doth conuince, That Saints may know what is done in the world, and also [Page 304] the secrets of hearts. For to see the whole world, and A what is done in it, is not higher knowledge, nor requires a more perfect vnderstanding, than to see face to face, the Diuine essence immense and incomprehensible, before whom, the world is no more than Momentum staterae & guttaroris antelucani: but the Saints of God (accor­ding Sap. 11.23. to Christian Faith) haue an eleuated vnderstanding, able to behold clearely and distinctly the Diuine essence, with the infinite beauties and perfections thereof: How B then can a Christian conceiue so meanly of them, as to doubt whether they haue sufficient vnderstanding, to behold things done in this inferiour world, as farre as they belong to their state?

ANSVVER.

If it be not certaine, either by Diuine Reuelation, or by o­ther infallible demonstration, That the blessed Saints deceased, C heare and vnderstand our Prayers, and behold the secret thoughts and intention of the heart Hug. Vict. in Epist. ad Rom. q. 228. Queritur an sancti, quorum pa­trocinia postula­mus, pro nobis in­terpellent? Resp. Sanctos pro nobis interpellare, non est aliud quam Deum pro meritis eorum bonos affectus quos habemus in eos propter Deum remunerare: & ideo nihil interest, siue nos audiant, fiue non. Ibid. lib. 2. d. Sacram. p. 16. c. vltimo., then it is a vaine thing to pray vnto them, by the confession of many of our Aduersa­ries Suar. d. Relig. to. 2. li. 1. c. 10. d. Orat. Si non cognoscunt nostras Orationes, videtur [...] & superuacaneum, orare ad ipsas D (animas) nam quod Medina respondet, &c. pa. 28. Molina. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. disp. 6. Quod si Ecclesia non supponeret, nostras Orationes ab eis videri atque audiri, prius oraret Deum, vteas illis reuelaret, deinde suas ad Beatos preces funderet. Lorca. d. Beatitud. Disp. 25. Perfectio Beatitudinis non attenditur ex cognitione ex­istentium quae Beatus in verbo videt, quae non videntur ex vi visionis, neque ex maiori penetratione essentiae, sed ostendente Deo pro suo bene placito.: but it is not certaine, either by Diuine Reuelation, or by any other infallible demonstration, That the soules of the bles­sed Saints deceased, heare and vnderstand our Prayers, and be­hold the secret thoughts and intention of the heart.

First, This degree of knowledge is appropriated to God himselfe Hieron. sup. Math. c. 9. Chrysost. in Matth. Hom. 30. & sup. Iohn. Hom. 23. Cyril. in Ioh. lib. 2. cap. 19. August. in Psal. 7. & in Psal. 33., 1. Kings 8.39. 2. Chro. 6.30. Rom. 8.27. Ier. 17.10. Heb. 4.13. 1. Cor. 14.25. Iob 34.21, 22. Psal. 11.4. Pro. 15.3. 1. Cor. 1. 11.

Secondly, That hee communicateth the same (at least­wise E ordinarily) to the glorified Saints, is not reuealed in his Word.

Thirdly, The Iesuits Argument, to wit, The glorious Saints [Page 305] behold the Diuine essence, immense and incomprehensible, with the in­finite A beautie and perfections thereof, face to face, 1. Cor. 13. 12. 1. Iohn 3.2. Ergo, They behold the secrets of mens hearts liuing on earth, is denied; for glorious Saints behold the Diuine essence in a finite manner Aquin. 1.2. q. 3. ar. 1. Montesin. ib. disp. 3. n. 3. Beati non vident Deum visione increata, &c. Sed creata vi­sione, & fruitione Dei funt Beati. Martinez. ib. dub. 4. ad 1. Visio beati­fica est infinita se­cundum quid ex parte obiecti, abso­lute tamen est fini­ta. Gandau. Quod­lib. 7. q. 4. Dico quod tum propter limitationem intel­lectus creatisic eleuati, tum propter ipsum obiectum, voluntariè se demonstrans, & alia quae in se videntur, tum propter ipsum cognitum, potest ipsa diuina essentia videri siue cognosci ab intellectu creato, absque omni cogni­tione seu visione alicuius creaturae in illa aut per illam., and according to the measure and capaci­tie of creatures, and so farre foorth onely as it pleaseth God, and is sufficient for their beatitude. But no diuine Reuelation affirmeth, that it pleaseth God Aquin. in 4. Sent. d. 49. q. 2. ar. 5. ad. 6. Sicut se osten­dit cui vult, ita in se ostendit quae vult. Velosillo. Aduert. in 9. To. Aug. q. 16. Omnis [...] & perfectio visio­num beatificarum, prouenit à lumine gloriae, hoc est à [...] diuina, & bonitate Dei, qui disponere potest C quatenus & quantum se extendat cognitio cuiuscunque videntis Deum., or is necessarie to their bea­titude, that they should vnderstand the secrets of mens hearts heere vpon earth: and accordingly Saint Augustine saith Aug. lib. d. cur. pro. mort. c. 13. Ibi sunt spiritus defunctorum, vbi non vident quaecunque aguntur, aut eueniunt hominibus in hac vita., The soules of the defunct are there, where they see not all things which B are done, or which happen to people in this life. And concerning the sequel of the former Argument, Aquinas himselfe saith A­quin. p. 1. q. 12. ar. 8. Angeli nesciunt futura contingentia, & cogitationes cordium, hoc enim solius Deiest., The blessed Angels behold the Diuine Essence, and yet they know not all things, but they are ignorant of future things, being contingent, and of the cogitations of the heart Vid. Aquin. 1. p. q. 57. ar. 4. Malon. in 2. Sent. d. Angel. Disp. 16..

And whereas the Argument is further pressed, They which know or see the greater, vnderstand and behold the lesse: But the Saints behold the Essence of God, which is the greater, and there­fore they vnderstand the secrets of mens hearts. The Answere is Aquin. p. 1. q. 12. ar. 8. ad 2. Ad secundum di­cendum quod vi­dens speculum, non est necessa­rium, quod omnia in speculo videat, nisi speculum visu suo comprehendat. Bannes. ibid. pag. 179. Nulla est im­plicatio, quod aliqua cognitio attingat obiectum primarium sui, & non attingat obiectum secundarium-Poterit esse tam remissum lumen gloriae, vt tantum ostendat diuinam essentiam, quae est obiectum prima­rium, & non aliquam creaturam., That if the greater and the lesse be of the same kinde, and if the greater doe necessarily represent the lesse, ad extra, or D externally; and hee which vnderstandeth the greater, com­prehendeth the whole perfection and latitude thereof; then it is true, that they which know or see the greater, vnderstand and see the lesse: but if any of these conditions be wanting, then the same is false Durand. 3. Dist. 14. q. 2. n. 4. Intellectus creatus videns clare E diuinam essentiam, videt in ipsa omnia, quae per ipsam naturaliter, & ex necessitate representantur, alia [...] non. Martinez. 1.2. q. 5. ar. 2. dub. 1. Conclus. 4. Creaturae sunt in Deo, vt in causa & Principio: sed non oportet vt cognito Principio vel causa, cognoscantur omnes effectus vel conclusiones: Ergo, benè potest videns Deum, non videre omnes creaturas in illo, & sic vnus alio plures vel [...] videre.. First, Euery one which beholdeth the Sunne, doeth not behold euery thing which the Sunne [Page 306] effecteth or inlightneth Velosillo. Ad­uert. in. 9. to. Aug. ad Quaesit. 16. Dato quod quis Solem, ita perfectè cognos­ceret, sicut beatus Deú cognoscit, non oporteret vt cog­nosceret distinctè & singularitèr omnes effectus Solis, ergo nequè oportet quod beatus in Deo cognoscat om­nes effectus Dei.. Secondly, Angels behold the face A of God, Math. 18. 10. and yet they may be ignorant of some inferiour things Malon. 2. [...]. Angel. Disp. 7. Aquin. 1. pa. q. 58. ar. 5. Cognoscunt mysteria gratiae, non quidem omnia, nec equaliter omnes, sed secundum quod Deus voluerit eis reuelare., to wit, of some supernaturall misteries Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. Nullus beatus cognoscit necessario, & ex natura visionis beatificae, aliquam creaturam, quantum ad eius actualem existentiam, sed cognitio actualis existentiae cuiuscunquè creaturae, pendet ex dispositione di­uinae voluntatis., Eph. 3.10. and of the houre when the day of iudgement shall be, Math. 24.36. And Bannes saith, No blessed Saint beholdeth all indi­uiduals, or their cogitations in the diuine Essence Ibidem. Sum. Text. Nullus beatus videt in diuina Essentia omnia indiuidua, omnes cogi­tationes B eorum, & omnia quae non sunt facta, fieri tamen possunt..

IESVIT.

Secondly, As for the secrets of hearts, God is without comparison, more spirituall, more secret, more inuisible, and out of the sight of naturall vnderstanding, than is any the most secret thought of man or Angell: and yet the Saints haue so cleere penetrating and all discouering light, as they do most perspicuously discerne the diuine, most hid­den, C and vnsearchable Essence. What reason then is there, why Christians should thinke the secrets of mens hearts in­uisible Hier. 17. 9. Colloss. 1.15. 1. Tim. 1.17. and vnsearchable vnto them? If we looke into Scripture, as the heart of man is said to be vnsearchable, but to God onely: so likewise God is said to be inuisible but on­ly to himselfe; so that to Saints, together with the sight of hearts, we must deny the fight of God, or else interpret the D sayings of Scipture, That mans heart and God are inuisible, to wit, by meere naturall light, and that both are visible vnto Saints by that light, whereof the Prophet said, In thy light we shall see the light. Psal. 35. 10.

ANSWER.

The inconsequence of this Argument is palpable: for there is the same reason of Angells, and of glorified Saints, in respect E of beatifical vision. But Angels, although they behold the face of God, yet they vnderstand not the cogitations of mans heart, according to the Tenet of Aquinas Aquin. 1. p. quaest. 57. ar. 4. Cog­noscere cogitationes cordis est proprium Dei, Ierem. 17. Ergo Angeli nó cognoscunt secreta cordis. himselfe. And if the Ad­uersarie [Page 307] flie to diuine Reuelation, and will affirme, that Angels A and blessed Saints vnderstand the thoughts of mens hearts, be­cause God doth manifest the same vnto them, as he did some­times to the Prophets.

First, he must remember that his bare word, or [...] is no proofe, for he was neuer in heauen to bring vs newes from thence Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 22. c. 29. Et illa quidem actio, vel potiùs quies atquè otium, quale suturum sit si verum velim dicere nescio. Non enim hoc vn­quam per corporis sensum vidi. Si autem hoc mente & intelligentia vidisse me dicam, quantum est aut quid est nostra intelligentia ad illam excellentiam?, & the word of God is silent in teaching this Doctrine.

Secondly, if God reucale, and report the prayers of the li­uing B to the Saints, before the Saints know them, God is a Nun­cio, and as it were a Mediator betweene one creature and ano­ther; and the inuocation of Saints is a circle, first passing imme­diately to God himselfe, then from God to Saints, and then backe againe to God.

Thirdly, Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe sheweth the weake­nesse of the former assertion of our Aduersarie, saying Bellar. d. sanct. beatitud. lib. 1. cap. 20. Si indigerent Sancti noua Reue­latione Ecclesia nō diceret ita audacter omnibus Sanctis o­rate pro nobis: Sed peteret aliquando à Deo vt reuelaret eis praeces nostras. Deindè non possit ratio reddi tam facilè, cur Sancti nunc inuocantur, & antè aduentum Christi non inuocarentur., If the Saints needed a new Reuelation, the Church could not with such bold­nesse say to all the Saints, Pray for vs, but it should rather beseech C God (at least sometimes) that he would reueale our Prayers vnto them. Besides, the reason could not so easily be giuen, why Saints should be inuocated now, and not be inuocated before Christs comming.

IESVIT.

If there were a glasse of Diamond so cleere and ex­cellent, that whatsoeuer is done in London in secret cor­ners, D should therein particularly and distinctly appeare; surely he that hath eyes to see that glasse, may likewise there­in discerne what is done all ouer the citie. Now most cer­taine it is, that in God, all creatures, all actions done in the world, and all the most secret thoughts of hearts so per­spicuously and distinctly shine, as they are in themselues, so that the Saints hauing light to see the diuine Essence, may E in him cleerely discerne whatsoeuer is done in the world, be­longing to their state, though neuer so secret, according to the saying of S. Gregorie Greg. Homil. 40. Qui Creatoris sui claritatem vident nihil in creatura a­gitur quod videre non possunt, lib. 12, Moral. c. 13.: Nothing is done about any crea­ture which they cannot see, who see the claritie of the Creator. And againe we must beleeue, that they who see [Page 308] the claritie of the omnipotent God within themselues, are A not ignorant of any thing that is without, which that Pro­testants may the lesse dislike, I prooue to be grounded on the Scriptures.

ANSVVER.

The Popish speculation of the speculatiue glasse of the Tri­nitie, is not Catholicke Doctrine in their owne Schole AEstius. in 4. Sent. d. 46. §. 19. Non est necesse af­firmare, quod sem­per omnes Sancti cum Christo reg­nantes, cognoscant particularitèr, om­nium & singulorū praeces quomodo­cun (que) generalitèr, ad se directas, & fortè ob huiusmo­di dubitatiunculam non fuit visum pa­tribus, Trid. Con­cilij, quaestionem hanc an Sācti, prae­ces viuentium cog­noscāt absolutè de­finire., and therefore the Iesuit is ouerseene in obtruding the same vpon vs. Pius a Ponte Pius a Pont. in 1. p. Tho. qu. 12. ar. 8. dub. 5. Dicen­dum igitur diuinam essentiam non dici proprie speculum, nequè per Metaphoram ei propriè accomodari condi­tionem speculi. Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. Resp. Cum. Caiet. in hoc art. & colligitur ex D. Tho. q. 8. d. Verit. ar. 4. & q. 12. ar. 6. Diuina Essentia, propriè loquendo, non est speculum creaturarum, nec creaturae continentur in ipsa tanquam in speculo. Quoniam de ratione speculi est, quod representet per distinctas species acceptas ab ipsis rebus representatis. Continentur ergo creaturae in diuina Essentia propriè loquendo, tanquam in causa ef­fectiua & exemplari & ita continentur per modum vnius, & eodom modo representantur, & ex consequenti non est necesse, quod visa diuina Essentia, distincte cognoscantur in ipsa, omnes creaturae. a moderne Scholeman, hath these words: The diuine Essence cannot bee tearmed a Glasse properly, neither by B Metaphor doth the condition (or likenesse) of a Glasse properly agree vnto it: and he citeth for his Tenet, Thomas, Caietan, Capreolus, Durand, Ferrariensis, and Bannes, and the greater part of Ponti­ficians hold, that it doth not represent things, according to the manner of a naturall Glasse, but onely according to the good will and pleasure of God, and thereupon they say, that it is Speculatum voluntarium Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. D q. 12. ar. 8. Nullus beatus cognoscit necessario, & ex natura visionis beatificae, aliquam creaturam quantum ad eius actualem existentiam, sed cognitio actualis existentiae cuiuscunquè creaturae, pendet ex dispositione Diuinae vo­luntatis. Gabriel. Biel. 3. d. 14. q. vnic. Deus est speculum voluntarium ostendens in se quae vult, caetera occultans, nec in eo relucent, nisi quae vult à vidente se cognosci, quià Deus in intellectu se videntis causat cognitionem vo­luntariè, & contingentèr illarum creaturarum quas vult [...], & quarum cognitionem non causat, occultare dicitur. Velosillo. Aduert. in Aug. tom. 9. ad. q. 16. Ità intelligendum est quod inquit Augustinus lib. de vid. Deo. Deum esse speculum voluntarium, quià, scilicet plus velminus ostendit se, & ea quae in se lucent, prout ipse vult., such a glasse as (according to our manner of apprehension) maketh reflection of such notices as God is pleased to manifest, more or lesse Bannes, in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. B. Dominicus, B. Franciscus fortè sunt aequales in beatitudine, & tamen B. Dominicus alia videt in verbo, & alia B. Franciscus. AEstius. 4. sent. d. 46. §. 19. Est speculum illud voluntarium, repraesentans in se, ipsum aspicientibus, ea quae vult, & quandò vult., when, in what man­ner, C and to what persons himselfe pleaseth. And therefore the Iesuits supposition, if there were a glasse of diamond, may conclude according to the reflection of a naturall glasse, but it is inconsequent according to the reflection of a volun­tarie glasse Idem. Diuina Essentia necessario & naturalitèr repraesentat diuino intellectui omnes cogitationes & volitiones ipsius Dei, intellectui verò creato nullam repraesentat necessariò, sed prorsus voluntate libera repraesentat quas vult cogitationes. Occham. in sent. lib. 4. q. 13. Deus est speculum voluntarium, & aliquae creaturae possunt videri in eo sine alijs, ità quod beatus non E videat alios effectus nec creaturas in Deo, nec sicut in causa, nec sicut in speculo praesentante, nec sicut in effi­ciente, sed si naturalitèr repraesentaret, tunc non videtur ratio, quarè vna creatura esset magis visa, quam alia..

Gregorie, in the places obiected, according to Aquinas Aquim. p. 1. q. 12. ar. 8. Ad. 1. Gre­gorius loquitur, quantum ad sufficientiam obiecti, scilicet, Dei, quod quantum in se est, sufficienter continet om­nia, & demonstrat. Non tamen sequitur quod vnusquisquè videns Deum, omnia cognoscar, quià non perfectè comprehendit ipsum., spea­keth [Page 309] of the sufficiencie of the obiect in it selfe, and not of the A actuall demonstration which it maketh: or else he speaketh of the knowledge of all things essential to blessednesse, as Occham and Lombard take it Occham. Dial. pa. 2. tr. 1. cap. 3. Dicédum est quod dicit magister. sent. lib. 2. d. 11. Grego­rius haec dicit lo­quens de Angelis, &c. videtur dicere quod omnia sciant Angeli, & nihil sit quod nesciant: sed hoc accipiendū est de hijs, quorum cognitio beatum facit cognitorem, vt sunt ea quae ad B mysterium vnitatis & Trinitatis pertinent.. And if his words be taken general­ly, then it will follow, that the blessed Saints are ignorant of nothing that is done without them, and that they be­hold intuitiuely euery particular and speciall action and mo­tion, both of superiour and of inferiour creatures: but our Aduersaries themselues denie this Nauarret. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. contr. 44. Non enim beatus, eo ipso quo aliquis viator fuit commissus eius regimini, [...] cogitationis [...], &c. 282. Ad. b. Virginem non [...] cognoscete omnes cogitationes Christi Domini., as it hath formerly beene shewed.

IESVIT.

First, if Saints by reason of their blisfull estate do so participate of diuine nature and wisdome, as they commu­nicate with him in the power of gouerning the nations of C the world, then Saints haue knowledge of things that are done in this world, else how could they be able to gouerne and rule it. But Scriptures in plaine and expresse tearmes, make Saints participate with Christ in the rule and gouern­ment of the world, according to his promise, To him that Apoc. 2. 26. conquereth, I will giue power ouer Nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of Yron, that is, with power of inflexible equitie. I will make him a pillar in the Apoc. 3. v. 12. Temple of my God. And the blessed Saints say of them­selues, D That they were chosen out of Countries and Nati­ons Apoc. 5. v. 10. to be the Priests of God, and that they should rule with him vpon the earth: Therefore they know what is done vpon earth, so farre forth at least, as the affaires of earth do specially appertaine vnto them, and such, without doubt, are our deutionos towards them.

ANSWER. E

The places of Scripture which you produce to prooue your Assumption &c. speake not in plaine and expresse tearmes of Saints deceased, but of the Saints liuing in this present [Page 310] world Viegas in A­poc. cap. 2. Com­ment. 4. Sect. 6. Itaque illud existi­mamus, duos esse sensus literales hu­ius loci. Vnum vt promittatur Eccle­liae vniuersae, etiam in rebus tempora­libus faelicitas, quod nimirum gentes multas sibi subijciat, imperium in subditos securè exerceat, tantaque sit po­tentia, vt rebelles possit facile coercere, haereticorum impetus comprimere, denique aduersariorum vires fran­gere, nulliusque potentiam formidare. Alterum vt ijs qui vicerit, id est, Iezabeli eiusque Sectatoribus, videlicet tum prauis hominibus, tum Haereticis, sese strenue & animose opposuerint, promittatur fore, vt ob [...] pro­bitatem, B aduersusque Iezabelem animi magnitudinem, in alto dignitatis gradu collocentur, praelatique aliorum efficiantur, itaque ad eum locum euehantur, ex quo alios virga ferrea, id est inflexibili & aequissima regant, le­gumque sanctitate deuinciant: rebelles autem ac petulantes, imperio compescant, & Disciplinae seueritate in officio contineant, aut si nolint pro ratione muneris in eos animaduertant. Ribera. Apoc. 2. v. 26. Omnino loquitur de potestate quam sancti exercebunt in die iudicij, in omnes Gentes qui Christo non paruerint iudi­cantes eas cum Christo & aeternae morti tradentes.. And if they be expounded of Saints deceased, the iu­diciarie A power mentioned in these Texts, is that which shal be exercised by them, at the last day, when they shall be assessors with Christ, Mat. 19, 28.1. Cor. 6, 2. And in this manner the an­tient Expositors, Victorinus, Arethas, Beda, Rupertus, Ansbertus, and also Hugo Carensis, Albertus, Lira, Viegas, Alchasar, &c, expound the first place, Reuel. 2.26 Rupert. in [...]. lib. 2. In isto gradu vincere, est omnes quae infirmum faciunt hominem passiones superare, gaudium, timorem, spem, atque dolorem, de animo propellere atque sugare, id est seculo non gaudere, seculum non timere, secularia non sperare, pro secularibus non dolere. Ansbert. in Apoc. 2. Si quod membrorum digne capiti in haeserit, veraciter habere dicitur quod ipsum caput hereditario iure possidere probatur. An non Ecclesia in capite suo potestatem super Gentes accepit, quae in Sanctis praedicatoribus ipsas Gentes ex quibus constat, authoritate capitis sui, vigore capitis sui, scientia capitis sui, docet & regit atque ab illicitis operibus censura districtionis coercet? Sed nec mirum si super Gen­tes potestatem habet Ecclesia in terris, quae ligandi atque soluendi potestatem accepit in coelis pariter & in ter­ris. Albert. sup. Apoc. 2. Dabo illi potestatem super Gentes. Glossa in hocseculo: & ad literam creuit Ecclesia C tempore confessorum in Dominijs & possessionibus muitis. Hugo. Card. ib. Et reget illas in verga ferrea: ad literam, benè tenent hoc hodiè praelati Ecclesiarum quorum multi durius vexant subditos suos quam Laici. Alchasar. ibid. Res ipsa postulat, vt virgam hanc ferream viris Euangelicis in hac vita dari credamus. Ribera. ibid. Omnino loquitur, de potestate quam Sancti exercebunt in die iudicij..

The second place, Reuel. 3.12. is expounded of such as are Pillars in the Church militant, by Gregorie, Ticonius, Primasius, Haimo, Beda, Andreas, Aretas, Anselmus, Richardus, Ioachimus, Al­bertus, Lira, Thomas, Zegerus, and Suares, (as Alchasar Alchas. in 3. cap. Apoc. v. 12. Gregorius. 17. Mo­ral. cap. 14. No­men columnae ac­cipit de ijs, qui in Eccles. militanti officium columnatum egregie praestant: atque eam expositionem sequuntur hoc loco, Ti­conius, Primasius, Haimo, Beda, Andreas, Aretas, Anselmus, Richardus, Ioachimus, Albertus, Lyra, Tho­mas, Zegerus, Suarez, & caeteri finè omnes. Haec omnino mihi videtur sequenda expositio. the Ie­suit citeth them, in his Commentarie vpon that Text, who al­so confuteth Ribera Ad Argumenta Riberae, &c. expounding the same of the Church tri­umphant.) D

The third place Apocal. 5. 10. is expounded of the Church Militant by Rupertus, Hugo Carensis, Gagneus, Al­bertus, Alchasar, &c. And if it bee vnderstood of the blessed Saints, they reigne vpon earth, by their Doctrine and E vertuous examples which they haue left behind them, and they reigne vpon earth also, not in their owne persons, by actu­all regiment, but in the person of Christ their head. Ambro­sius [Page 311] Ansbertus Ansb. in A­poc. li. 2. pa. 346. [...] potestatem, quam in tempore homo factus à pa­tre accepit vnige­nitus Dei, electis suis se dare repro­mittit, sed in se à quo totum regitur corpus, & cui to­tum Ecclesiae inhae­ret corpus, ipse enim secundum Apostolum, caput est omnium Electorum. Si quod ergo membrorum digne capiti inhaeserit, veraciter habere dicitur, quod ipsum caput hereditario iure possidere probatur, an non Eccle­sia in capite suo potestatem supet gentes accepit, quae in Sanctis praedicatoribus, ipsas gentes ex quibus con­stat, B authoritate capitis sui, vigore capitis sui, scientia capitis sui docet & regit, atque ab illicitis operibus cen­sura districtionis coercet? Sed nec mirum si super gentes potestatem habet Ecclesia in terris, quae ligandi at­que soluendi potestatem accepit in coelis, pariter & in terris. who liued in the yeare 890, hath these words: A That power which the onely begotten Sonne of God, being made man in time receiued of his Father, he promiseth to giue to his Elect, but in himselfe by whom the whole body is ruled, and to whom the whole body of the Church is vnited; for he, as the Apostle saith, is the head of all the Elect. If any member therefore shall bee worthy to continue with the head, he is truely said to haue that which the head himselfe is prooued to possesse by right of inheritance. The like is said by Haimo Haimo. in Apoc. 2. 26. Illam potestatem, quam Christus homo factus accepit a patre, electis suis se dare promittit, sed nisi quo totum corpus regitur, & cui totum Ecclesiae corpus [...], cum enim ipse sit caput Electorum, electi vero membra illius, quod ipsum caput habet, hoc electi possidere videntur, haereditario iure..

And from hence it appeareth, that the Iesuites exposition of the places in the Reuelations, is voluntarie, nouell, neuer heard off in the antient Church, nor deliuered by elder Ponti­ficians, neither is the same followed at this day, by the learned Expositours of the Church of Rome it selfe: and therefore his C argument being raysed vpon Scripture fondly expounded Gillius. Com. Th. d. sacr. doc. & Deo. l. 1. tr. 7. c. 7. in dogmarum defen­sione aut confir­matione vtendum semper vero atque indubitato sensu scripturae. Namque si sensus certo non constet, neutiquā potest concludere rem tanquam de fide certum. 329., is of no force. For when hee argueth in this manner: Saints per­take with Christ in the rule and gouernment of the World; Ergo, they heare, and vnderstand the prayers and deuotions of the liuing, which are made vnto them: Our answer is, that the blessed Saints doe not partake with Christ, as his Ministers, Vicegerents, or Coadiutors in the actuall rule and gouernment of the inferiour world, but they onely partake with him in his gouernment, as the friends of the Bridechamber partake with D the Bridegroome, by reioycing, consenting, and reaping in­crease of glorie, and happinesse, by his actuall rule and gouern­ment. And this latter compartnership with Christ, in gouern­ment, prooueth not, that the blessed Saints heare and vnderstand the prayers of the liuing: but to make his sequele good, the Ie­suit must prooue, both that blessed Saints partake with Christ, according to the first branch of my distinction, and also that they partake with him, intirely and perfectly in euery action of his gouernment. AEstius. in 4. sen. d. 46. §. 19. Non est necesse [...], quod semper om­nes Sancti, cum Christo regnantes cognoscant particulariter omnium & [...] preces, &c. For it is possible for one to bee of Councell, and to be assistant in gouernment to a King, and yet not to bee E partaker of all the Kings secrets, nor to concurre with him in all actions of Emperie.

IESVIT. A

Secondly, S. Paul saith, Now wee know but in part, 1. Cor. 13. v. 9. wee prophesie but in part, but when that of perfecti­on shall come, that of part shall be euacuated; I now know but in part, then I shall know as I am knowne. By which words the Apostle signifies, that all Knowledge, both Humane and Diuine, particularly the gift of Prophesie, B is contained eminently in the Beatificall Light: So that the blessed Saints haue the gift of Prophesie in a more excellent degree, than had the Prophets in this world. But by the light of Prophesie, holy men vnited with God, could see the secrets of hearts, as S. Paul saith, By the gift of Prophesie the 1. Cor. 14. secrets of hearts are manifested; and also see things ab­sent, being present, by Light of Vnderstanding, from whence they were absent according to their substance. The Prophet Elizeus saw in absence what passed betwixt his seruant C Gehezi and Naaman, to whom he said, My heart was 4. Kings 5.24. there present with thee. With farre greater reason, saith S. Augustine, the Saints of God, euen with eyes of bodie Aug. lib. 22. d. Ciuit. Dei, c. 29. Videbunt Sancti omnia clau­sis occulis etiam, vnde sunt corpore absentes. Hierom. aduers. Vi­gilant. closed vp, shall see all things, not onely present, but also from which they are corporally absent. This is that which Saint Hierome doth so earnestly defend against Vigilantius, That the soules of the Martyrs are present where their Shrines and Reliques are, and neuer absent, but still readie D to heare the prayers of their suppliants: not thinking (as Dr Field imposeth vpon him) that they are present in so Field, of the Church, lib. 3. cap. 20. many places substantially, according to their soules, but that they are present as Elizeus was present vnto Gehezi, in spirit, beholding what passed as cleerely, as if they were corporally present.

ANSWER. E

That the blessed Saints in Heauen haue the gift of Prophesie formally, eminently, or in actu exercito, in respect of all indiui­duall Obiects, is neither expressely affirmed by S. Paul, neither can it be collected from his Doctrine; for the vse and end of [Page 313] this gift, was the edification of the Church Militant, 1. Cor. 12. A 10. Eph. 4. 11, 12. And because this end ceaseth, in regard of the blessed Saints, Apoc. 14. 13, therefore wee haue no certain­tie Salas, in 1. 2. q. 3. tr. 2. disp. 6. Sect. 3. AEgid. d. Praesent. to. 2. d. Beatitud. lib. 11. q. 8. ar. 13. §. 2. AEstius, in 4. Sent. d. 45. §. 2. Prophetiae cua­cuabuntur, Linguae cessabunt, &c. Quae tria tantum ad vsum praesentis seculi pertinent., that they ordinarily and perpetually enioy the same.

And if it were graunted, that they had this gift eminently; yet it followeth not, that they haue the exercise of it, accor­ding to euerie materiall Obiect it had in this life: for some Obiects of Prophesie are contingent, and accidentally Nauarret. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. Mysteria quae per accidens pertinent ad fidem, licet re­uelentur aliquibus Beatis secundum voluntatem Dei: tamen non habent talem connexionem necessariam, cum ijs, quae in via homo ex fide desiderat cognoscere, vt in illa cognitione per fidem, inueniamus sufficiens princi­pium, ad dicendum quod in patria cognoscuntur. belon­ging to Propheticall Grace; and euerie act of knowledge belon­geth not to the perfection of the glorified state.

Imperfection of knowledge, to wit, in respect of the man­ner of knowing, and the Obiect knowne, and the Subiect vnder­standing, shall be remooued in the blissefull state. But where doth S. Paul affirme, That the blessed, by Diuine Vision, or Reuelation, C vnderstand all particular Obiects, which they knew in this life? Aquinas himselfe Aquin. 1. p. q. 12. ar. 8. ad. 4. Cognoscere singu­laria, & cogitata & facta eorum, non est de perfectione intellectus creati, nec ad hoc eius na­turale desiderium tendit. hath these words: To know all particular, or indiuiduall things, and the cogitations and actions of the same, belongeth not to the perfection of a created vnderstanding, neither doth his naturall desire affect this. Also the same Author Aquin. sup. 1. Cor. 13. Lect. 4. Cognoscam ficut cognitus sum, id est, sicut Deus cognouit essentiam meam, ita Deum cognoscam per essentiam. Hug. Carensis, ibid. Lyra, & Dionys. Carth. ibid., with Hugo, Lyra, and others, commenting vpon S. Pauls words, 1. Cor. 13. 12. (Then shall I know, euen as also I am knowne) ex­poundeth them of the intuitiue knowledge which B. Saints in Heauen shall haue of God himselfe, and not of all other created D Obiects. But from hence it followeth not, That Saints decea­sed shall intuitiuely, or by reuelation, know all other inferiour things, as I haue formerly prooued in my Answer to the Iesuits second Paragraph.

S. Augustine, d. Ciuit. Dei, Lib. 22. cap. 29 Nunc quid Ac­turi sunt in corpo­ribus immortalibus atque spiritalibus sancti, &c., Prosper. d. Vit. Cont. Lib. 1. cap. 4. Receptis cum incorruptione, [...]; immortalitate cor­poribus, &c. speake of the knowledge of blessed men after their resurrection, affirming, That when they shall be all of them together in Heauen, their hearts shall be open each of E them to other: but that the hearts of them which remaine vp­on Earth, are open to the [...] Saints, is not affirmed by these Fathers.

S. Hierome against Vigilantius, speaketh in heat of Disputati­on: [Page 314] but he affirmeth in another place, Hieron. Matth. 9. Sed Dominus videns cogitationes eorum, ostendit se Deum qui posset cordis occulta noscere. That because Iesus knew the A thoughts of some of the Scribes, he did thereby shew himselfe to be God.

IESVIT.

Thirdly, It is clearely to be prooued by Scripture, That holy Angels see the Prayers, and Actions, and Affections of men. In the Apocalypse, an Angell offered vnto God the Apocalyps. 8. 4. Prayers of men; which he could not haue done, had he not knowne them.

ANSVVER. B

First, The place of S. Iohn, Apocal. 8.4. prooueth not, either clearely, or obscurely, that holy Angels heare the Prayers, or see the Actions and Affections of men. For the Angell menti­oned, is expounded by the antient Expositors, and by the Ro­mists themselues, not of an Angell by Nature, but of an Angell by Office; and by some of them, of an Angell by Type. Alber­tus Albert. sup. A­poc. 8. Dicit ergo, & alius Angelus, id est, Christus, qui est Angelus magni Concilij. in his Commentarie: S. Iohn saith, Another Angell, that is, Christ, who is the Angell of the Couenant, Esay 9. Dionifius Carthu­sian Dionis. Carthus. in Apoc. 8. Dicunt Doctores Catholici hoc loco statum & cursu Ecclesiae ple­nius quasi à princi­pio demonstrari at­que conscribi. Vnde per Angelum istum intelligunt Christū, qui est magni Con­cilij Angelus, & per Incarnationis My­sterium venit in mundum, stetitque ante Altare, id est, in conspectu Ecclesiae, quae secundum Berengandum & Bedam Altare voca­tur., Catholike Doctors, &c. by this Angell vnderstand Christ, who C is the Angell of the great Councell, and which by the Mysterie of his Incarnation came into the world, and stood vpon the Altar of the Crosse. Blasius Viegas Vieg. in Apoc. 8. Sect. 2. Nec vero rectè, quidam erecentioribus argumentatur Angelum istum Christum esse non posse, quod Christus nunquam Angelus absolutè dicitur: satis enim est vt ex consequentibus facilè intelligi possit Christum esse, quae nisi Christo, alteri aptè accommodari non possunt. Cuius enim alterius est vniuersae Ecclesiae incensa, hoc est orationes in Thuribulo aureo tanta maiestatis specie, Patri offerre? Cuius praeterquam Christi fuit de igne quo Thuribulum aureum erat impletum, partem in terras misisse, easque diuini­amoris igne inflammasse, &c. Apparet autem Christus Sacerdotis personam gerens, vt eius pro nobis apud Pa­trem intercessio atque interpellatio monstretur. a Iesuit, Wee may easily perceiue, that this Angell is Christ, because the things here spoken of him, can agree to no other but Christ: for who but he, can with so great Maiestie offer vp to God the Incense, that is, the Prayers of the vniuersall Church? Who besides him, is able out of the Perfuming Panne, to send downe into the Earth the fierie Coales of Diuine Charitie, and to inflame people with the bur­ning Graces of the holy Spirit? With these, agree Ambrose Ambros. sup. Apoc. vis. 3. c. 8. Iste Angelus, Christum sig­nificat., Pri­masius D Primas in Apoc. 8. Biblioth. Sanct. Colon. to. 6. pa. 2., Ansbertus Ansbert. in Apoc. 8. Bibl. Sanct. Col. to. 9. p. 2. pa. 393., Beda Bed. to. 5. sup. Apoc. li. 2., Haimo Haimo, in Apoc. 8., Hugo Cardinalis, and the Glosses Hugo Card. Glossae totum E legunt, hoc de Christo..

But if it were granted, that this Angel were a created or ministring Spirit, it cannot be prooued, that Angels vnderstand the secret cogitations of mans heart, any further than the same [Page 315] are manifested by signes, neither is it consequent, that people A ought to pray vnto them, for Priests offer the prayers of the Church to God, and yet no man doeth therefore inuocate Priests Aug. c. Epist. Parm. lib. 2. Sicut Parmenianus quodam loco Mediatorem posuit Episcopum, inter populum & Deum, quis eum ferret bonorum arque fidelium Christianorum..

IESVIT.

Our Sauiour witnesseth, That the Angels reioyce at Luke 15.10. the conuersion of a sinner: so they must needes know it, B nor can they know it without knowing the sinners heart, conuersion not being true, nor worthie of ioy, except it pro­ceed from the heart.

ANSWER.

Not onely the Angels of God, but holy men on earth, re­ioyce at the conuersion of a sinner, Luke 15.24. 2. Cor. 7.9. Likewise Parents, Ministers, and [...] reioyce, &c. and yet it followeth not from hence, That holy men on earth, which re­ioyce C at the conuersion of a sinner, see the secrets of the heart. 1. Cor. 2.11. So likewise Angels which are ministring Spirits, Heb. 1.14. may vnderstand by the signes and fruits of true re­pentance, the conuersion of diuers sinners, and consequently, they may reioyce, without intuitiue knowledge of the heart.

Secondly, Our Sauiours words, Luk. 15.10. are [...], the conclusion of a Parable, which must not be strained beyond the true scope Chrys. in Math. Hom. 48. [...]. D Origen. in Mat. c. 13. Salmeron. Tom 7. Tract. 3. In Parabola Haedorum & ouium iusti inducuntur dicentes, Domine quando te vidimus esurientem, &c. Non propteria haec dicuntur, quodiusti haecillo tempore verba dicturi sunt, &c.. But according to the exposition of sundrie Fa­thers Ambros. l. 7. in Luc. [...]. in Math. Can. 18. Ouis vna, homo intelligendus est: & sub vno homine vniuersitas sentienda est, sed in vnius Adae errore, omne ge­nus humanum aberrauit: Ergo, nonaginta nouem non errantes, multitudo Angelorum caelestium opinanda est, &c. Isiodor. li. Allegor. Homo habens centum [...], & relictis illis, [...] perditam quaerit, ac repertam humeris reuehit, figuram Christi expressit, qui relictis millibus Angelorū in coelo, ouem quae perierat in Adam, vt bonus pa­stor, quaesitam in gentilcus reperit: atque crucis suae humeris ad Paradisum reportauit. Chrysolog. Ser. 168., and some learned Papists Ca­ietan. sup. Luc. ca. 15. Parobola, &c. Significat, ipsum Iesum filium Dei, habentem centum oues (hoc est vniuersos Electos) quarum vna perdita natura humana est: Nonaginta vero nouem dimissae in deserto, omnes sunt Electi Angeli, quibus deest ad perficiendum electorum numetum genus humanum. Desertum autem caelum est seperatū omnimo a nobis. Aduentus ad quaerendum ouem [...], incarnatio est [...] Dei. Impositio ouis in humero Re­demptio est generis humani, in proprio corpore. Et quia sponte hoc fecit ideo gaudens describitur. Reditus domum Resurrectio & Assensio in caelum. Conuocatio amicorum & vicinorum, associatio est Angelica gaudens de reperatione E humana. Titus Bostrens. in Luc. 15. Christus Deus noster accendit lucernam, hoc est suam ipsius carnem, mun­dum (que) quae domus illius est euertit, hoc est a peccatis expiauit, id est drachmam, quae Regiae quidem ima­gine insignita erat, verū perturbationum caeno poenitus obruta, quaesiuit. Drachma autem inuenta, gaudio plenus, conuocauit caelestes virtutes, amat enim illas, conceptaeque laetitiae easdem participes, mysteriorumque oeconu­miae suae participes [...].: The hundred sheepe, Vers. 4. [Page 316] represent the whole Bodie of the Elect, consisting of men and A Angels: The ninetie and nine sheepe not lost, were the Angels, per­sisting in their prime integritie: The stray sheepe, all mankinde, sinning in Adam. To recouer this lost sheepe, the Sonne of God (that good Shepheard, Iohn 10. 11.) was incarnate, and by the gracious worke of Redemption, he laid the same on his shoulder. Now there is great ioy in heauen before the coe­lestiall Angels, for this recouerie and saluation of mankinde. But if this exposition be admitted, no more can bee inferred, but that the Court of heauen, and in the same, the holy Angels reioyce, because of mans Redemption. Neither is it conse­quent, B the holy Angels reioyce, because of the conuersion and reduction of mankind: Ergo, They know distinctly and per­petually the particular qualitie of euery indiuiduall sinners re­pentance.

Lastly, If the said words, Luke 15. 10. bee vnderstood of sinners in particular, this Text yet falleth short to prooue, that all the caelestiall Angels, perpetually, and at the very instant, know the particular true repentance of euery sinner, indiuidually: for the same may bee vnderstood according to this supposition or reflection, to wit, There is ioy before the An­gels C of heauen, ouer one sinner which repenteth, when the repentance of this one sinner, is made knowne vnto them: but it is not said, nei­ther can it bee inferred, That coelestiall Angels know con­stantly, and at all times, when each indiuiduall person repen­teth truely.

Our Aduersaries therefore cannot ground an infallible Do­ctrine, touching Angelicall science, vpon a branch of a Pa­rable (which according to themselues) admitteth diuers ex­positions, and the consequence whereof is not necessarie, but contingent, and vpon supposition. D

IESVIT.

Saint Paul saith, We are made a spectacle vnto God 1. Cor. 4. 9. and Angels, and he adiureth Timothie, by God and his Angels, which shew that wee liue in the sight of Angels, and that they behold what we doe, and heare what wee say, euen in our hearts. E

ANSWER.

Saint Pauls words are, 1. Corinth. 4. 9. Wee are made a [Page 317] spectacle to the world, and to Angels, and men: Angelis laudanti­bus, A & vituperantibus, hominibus laudantibus, & vituperantibus Aug. sup. Psal. 38., (saith Saint Augustine) To good Angels praysing vs, to euill Angels dispraysing vs, to good men commending vs, and to wicked men condemning and deriding vs.

The Consequence of this Argument, Wee are a spectacle to Angels, therefore Angels vnderstand and see our thoughts, is chil­dish: for as Saint Paul was a spectacle to Angels, so hee was a spectacle to good men, and bad men: and yet the Iesuite will blush, to argue hence, Ergo, Good men and bad men be­hold the heart. B

Secondly, As Saint Paul saith, I testifie before God and the Elect Angels: so Moses saith, I call this day, Heauen and Earth witnesses, Deuteron. 4. 26. & 32. 1. And Esay saith, Heare oh Heauens, and hearken oh Earth, Chap. 1. v. 2. Euery creature therefore which God calleth to witnesse, or adiu­reth man by, is not a fearcher and beholder of the thoughts and affections of the heart.

IESVIT. C

But as the same Scripture auerreth, The Saints are like 1. Tim. 5. 21. Luk. 20. 36. Matth. 22. 30. Apoc. 21. 17. Aug. Ep. 112. vnto the Angels, and equall vnto the Angels, and in hea­uen the same is the measure of a man and of an Angell: Ergo, Knowledge of our Prayers is not to bee denied vn­to glorious Saints, the fellowes of Angels.

ANSWER.

Matth. 22. 30. Our Sauiour saith, That in the Resurrection, D neither shall they marrie nor bee married, but are as the Angels of God in heauen. Luke 20. 36. They which shall bee counted wor­thie of that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marrie nor take wiues, neither can they die any more, for they are equall to Angels, and are the children of God, seeing they are the sonnes of the Resurrection.

In these words, First, The subiect is, Iust people, at the Re­surrection. Secondly, Concerning these, our Sauiour affir­meth, That they shall not marrie, &c. Thirdly, They shall bee as Angels, and equall to Angels. Fourthly, Hee ex­presseth, E wherein they shall be so, to wit, first, in freedome from secular Actions and Passions: secondly, in glorious A­doption, or reall Possession of all the priuiledges of the sonnes of God.

[Page 318] Now I admire, what Papists can extort from hence Jansen. Harm. [...]. ca. 117. Sunt sicut Angeli Dei, &c. immortales sci­licet, alimento & generatione non egentes, & ab om­nibus hijs passioni­b' liberi, atquè be­ata vita fruentes, non autèm in om­nib' sunt sicut An­geli Dei. Alph. Castro. lib. 3. c. Haer. V. Beatitudo. Verum haec authoritas (vt ingenuè fatear) solùm aequat homi­nes Angelis in hoc, quod nullum matrimonij vsum habebunt, sicut nec Angeli: non tamen ibidèm facit pares, quantum ad facialem visionem Dei. Respectu quarundam proprietatum beati, erunt Angelis aequales, non au­tem respecta officij Angelici. Iansen. Ib. B for in­uocation A of Saints; for there is no connexion betweene this Antecedent and Consequent, to wit, Iust men at the resurrection, shall liue as Angels, remote from all the necessities of a worldly life, and they shall be as the Angels of God, free from materiall and corporeall passions, and equall to the Angels in fruition of blessednesse. Ergo, the knowledge of our prayers which we make in this life, is not to be denied vnto glorious Saints, the fellowes of Angels.

The place of the Reuelations, chap. 21.17. is expounded by learned Papists three waies Vieg. in A­poc. 21. Sect. 2. Duae sunt communiores expositiones vna est, significari eadē mensura metiendā esse tā [...] quā hominis beatitudi­nem, hoc est tàm Angelo quam ho­mini iuxta magni­tudinem [...] & charitatis gloriam [...] ho­mines [...] gloriae [...], siquidem succedunt in locum eorum qui cediderunt.. First, the beatitude of men and Angels shall be measured with the same modell, to wit, accor­ding to the proportion of their grace & charitie. Secondly, men shall attaine the measure of Angelicall glorie, by succeeding into the place of them that fell. Thirdly, the hundred fortie foure cubits, mentioned in that place, were meated by a mea­sure containing the length of a man, which was the meat-wand, or measure which the Angell held in his hand. And this latter C exposition of the Text, is the literall sence, according to Al­chasar Alchasar. in Apoc. 21. v. 17. Hi centum [...] quatuor cubiti, dimensi sunt humana mensura, quam Angelus, manu habebat. Ex quo elicitur, primò calamum illum quo Angelus hoc aedificium metiebatur, fuisse iustam humanae staturae men­suram., Ribera Ribera. in Apoc. 21. v. 17. Cubitus quo murum Angelus dimensus est, non alia mensura est, quam hominis, id est, quam ea qua homines vti solent metiendo, hac mensura humana vsus Angelus nunc est, acsi di­cat, mensura quae est Angeli, id est, qua vsus est Angelus, est mensura hominis., &c.

But from none of these expositions, doth the Iesuits Argu­gument D conclude; not from the first, & the last, as is apparant to all men: neither yet from the second; for although the bles­sed Saints attaine the measure of Angelicall glorie, and fill vp the place which the declining Angels lost: Yet Angels may haue some power and actions, in respect of their present mini­sterie to the Church militant, which are diuers, and distinct from the power and actions of glorified Saints. For, if Angels themselues, although they are equall in essentiall beatitude, yet they differ in power and actions Stella. in Luc. 20. Nèc omnes An­geli sunt eiusdem meriti, nec eiusdem gradus & gloriae, sed quidā maioris glo­riae, & alij minoris. (according to the Tenet of the Schole Aquin. p. 1. q. 106. ar. 2. ad. 1.) then much more men and Angels, although they E partake in the same obiectiue blessednesse, yet they may haue different actions, and accidentall perfections, and consequent­ly Angels, in regard of their office, may be able to know and vnderstand that, which blessed Saints do not.

IESVIT. A

Neither could Saints without knowlege of humane af­faires be perfectly blessed, blessednesse being a state where­in all iust and reasonable desires of nature are satisfied with vttermost content. And who can thinke, that Saints full Psal. 16.15. Satiabor cum apparet gloria tua. both of glorie and charitie, do not earnestly desire to know such things as may concerne their honour done vpon earth, and the state of their friends and louers, liuing in danger, B to succour them by their intercessions, of whose saluation they be still sollicitous, though secure of their owne, as S. Cyprian. Serm. d. Mortal. Cyprian writes.

ANSVVER.

The blessed Saints in Heauen, can desire that only, which is according to the will of God, Math. 6. 10. But that it plea­seth God, they shall desire to know and vnderstand, all the par­ticular actions and occurrents of people on earth, or that they C shall desire to know, the honour which is done to them in the inferiour world, must be beleeued as a matter of Faith when the Papals prooue it by diuine Reuelation. And although, ac­cording to S. Cyprian, blessed Saints are sollicitous Cyprian. d. Mor­tal. n. 18. Magnus il­lic nos charorum numerus expectat, parentum, fratrum, filiorum, frequens nos & copiosa tur­ba desidereat, iàm de sua immortali­tate secura, & ad­huc de nostra salu­te sollicita. of the Saluation of the Chucrh militant, yet it followeth not, Ergo they heare the petitions of the liuing: for a father dwelling in London, which hath his sonne at Constantinople, is sollicitous of his sonnes safetie, and yet he vnderstandeth not all the par­ticulars about him. D

IESVIT.

Wherefore our Doctrine, that Saints see our prayers, being deliuered so constantly by the antient Fathers, so conformable to the principles of Christian beleefe, about the blessednesse of Saints, so consonant vnto expresse passa­ges of Scripture; we may easily expect, that vnto Prote­stants E it would not be displeasing, did they looke on it with vnpartiall eyes, specially, they hauing no Text of Scripture, that may make so much shew of direct opposition against it.

ANSWER. A

Your insinuations are coniecturall, and at the best, seeming­ly plausible, but your disputation is weake: wherefore we ad­mire your confidence in a case so groundlesse, and intreat you either to argue more soundly, or else to be lesse vaineglorious in your conclusions.

IESVIT.

The place continually obiected out of the Prophet Esay: B Abraham knew vs not, Israell was ignorant of vs, thou Isa. 63.16. O Lord art our Father, thou our Redeemer, hath this sence, that Abraham and Iacob when they did liue vp­on earth, and carnally beget children, did not know parti­cularly their posterities, and so could not beare them such particular affection; whereas God can and doth distinctly see, and know their necessities, and prouides against them, deliuering his children out of them: And therefore he is C the onely Father, the onely Redeemer, Abraham and Ia­cob not deseruing the name of Father, in comparison with God: What makes this against the Saints hearing our prayers?

ANSVVER.

We receiued our exposition of this place of Esay cap. 63.16. out of S. Augustine Aug. li. d. cur. pro mort. ca. 13. Tu es pater noster, quià Abraham nos nesciuit, & Israel non cognouit nos. Si tanti Patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatum ageretur, ignorauerunt, &c. Dionys. Carthus. sup. Esa. 63. ar. 92. Aug. in lib. d. Cura pro mort. dicit, Quod nesciant quid in isto seculo fiat, vel quid filij agant.: and I marueile, why the Iesuit reiecteth the same, and chuseth a worse, because his owne party Adam Sasboth. Com. Esa. 63. In tota Scriptura veteri nusquam inuenimus, eorum à quoquam implorata suffragia: causa est quià ab humana [...], & in tene­bris sedentes, non percipiebant orationes & vota viuentium, &c. Cornel. d. Lapid. Quinto Adamus appositè, Abra­ham inquit & Iacob nesciunt nos, resque nostras quià sunt in obscuro limbo patrum, vbi [...] luce & ope Dei, quam nos, non ergo eos imploramus qui nostras res & aerumnas [...], atquè [...] habent vt sibi consulant, sibiquè liberationem ex inferno procurent, sed te Domine, qui solus potes juuare & liberare tàm Abra­ham E quàm nos. Hac enim de causa in veteri Testamento non [...], quod [...], aut Sanctos degentes in limbo. Bellarm. d. sanct. beat. lib. 1. c. 20. Quià tamen B. Aug. lib. d. Cur. pro mort c. 13. Exponit de cognitione propriè dicta, ideò responderi etiàm [...] Abrahamum & [...] & alios [...] Testa­menti non cognouisse posteros suos viuentes, quià nondum beati erant, & naturalitèr mortui non sciunt quid vi­uentes agunt. con­fesseth, D that Abraham and the Patriarkes liuing in the darke lake of Limbus, did not heare the prayers of their posteritie, nor behold and vnderstand the affaires of their children, liuing vpon earth.

IESVIT. §. 3. A The worship of Spirit and Truth, with out­ward prostration of the bodie, due vnto Saints.

THe third cause of their dislike is, That we giue the ho­nor of the Creator, vnto the creature, honoring Saints with religious worship, with worship of Spirit and B Truth, euen to the prostrating of our bodies before them, whereby we giue them honor, due to God only, and bring in many Gods as the Heathens do. To this Obiection, made long ago by Faustus the Manichee, S. Austine answereth in Aug. contra Faustū li. 20. ca. 21. these words, The Christian people doth celebrate with re­ligious solemnitie, the memories of Martyrs, to the end to stirre vp themselues to their imitation, and that they may be assisted with their prayers, and associated vnto their C merits, &c. but with the worship tearmed in Greeke, La­tria, and which the Latine language cannot expresse in one word, being a certaine subiection, and seruitude due pro­perly to the Deitie only, wee do not honour any but onely God, nor thinke that this honour ought to be giuen but only to him. These words of S. Augustine shew the worship of Saints, to be on the one side more than ciuile, and on the other side lesse than diuine: more than ciuile, as proceeding D out of acknowledgement of the excellencie Saints haue, su­perior vnto all naturall; by which they be partakers of di­uine perfection, in that high degree, as no substance can by natureparticipate therof; and therfore S. Austine with good reason, tearmes it religious, Lesse than diuine, as pro­ceeding from persuasion of excellency, though superhumane; yet infinitely inferiour vnto the increate and immence ex­cellencie of God, yea depending essentially thereof. So that E honor is giuen them dependently of God, as being superex­cellent participants of his perfection, and his singular friends.

ANSVVER. A

Our Argument is, All religious worship is due to God onely: Pa­pists yeeld to Saints some religious worship: Ergo, Papists yeeld to Saints some worship due to God onely.

The Iesuit pretendeth to answere by distinction, out of S t. Augustine Aug. c. Faust. Manich. lib. 20. cap. 21. Populus Chri­stianus memorias Martyrum Religio­sa solennitate con­celebrat & ad excitandam imitationem & vt meritis eorum consocietur, atque orationibus [...], ita tamen vt nulli Martyrum, sed ipsi Deo Martyrum, [...] in memorias Martyrum constituamus Altaria., saying, That religious worship, is either simply Di­uine, and founded vpon infinite and increate excellencie, called Latria; or else superhumane, founded vpon Grace and Glorie, which is an excel­lencie finite and created. B

Papists yeeld the latter kinde of religious worship to bles­sed Saints and Angels, but not the former.

To this Answere, Protestants replie, saying, That there are no other kindes of worship, than there be Tables of the Mo­rall Law. But there are onely two Tables of the Morall Law, the former whereof teacheth Diuine Worship, and the second humane, ciuile, or of speciall obseruance Aquin. 22. q. 102 ar. 1.2.3. Dulia est quaedam species obseruantiae. q. 103. ar. 3.. And if there be a C mixt worship, partly Diuine, and partly humane; so much there­of as is Diuine, is proper to God, and may not be imparted to any Creature, Esay 42.8.

But against this, they obiect, That to euery kinde and degree of excellencie, there is a worship due, proportionall to that excellen­cie. But blessed Saints and Angels, haue a speciall kinde and degree of excellencie, superiour to theirs which liue vpon earth: Therefore a speciall honour, proportioned to their excellencie, and superiour to hu­mane, is due vnto them.

It is answered, That granting in blessed Saints and Angels, D an excellencie of Grace, and Glorie, and Honour, due in respect of the same: this prooueth not, that they are to bee adored with religious worship, for then holy persons vpon earth may bee worshipped with religious worship. But the vertue of Religion (according to the Tenet of the Schoole) re­specteth immedately increated excellencie, and Latria, and Religion, are all one Vasq. d. Ador. l. 1. Disp. 6. c. 1. n. 168 Cum Religio circa cultum Dei solum versetur, cultus & honor, qui proxime Sanctis defertur, adipsam non poterit referri, alioquin si esset Actus Religi­onis, E Latriae quo (que) diceretur, Latria enim & Religio idem sunt. Ib. c. 4. n. 180. Religio quae est peculiaris virtus, non potest ipsis honorem [...], quae solum increatam Dei excellentiam, non autem creatam proxime respicit. Ibid. Disp. 8. c. 2. n. 200. Cum proximus terminus cui exhibetur adoratio, sit excellentia, quam in se res habet, quamuis ad aliam referatur superiorem [...] ex ea tamen cultus, & adorationis natura pensanda est, etiamsi propter [...] tanquam remotum terminum exhibeatur.: and if Saints and Angels may be wor­shipped with religious worship, they may bee serued with the [Page 323] worship of Latria. And if they answer that worship of Saints A is a materiall action of religion, this answer is confuted by the schoolemen themselues, who also affirme, that the worship of Saints, &c. is an act of Dulia Bonav. 3. ar. 2 q. 4. Alius est mo­dus adorandi creatorem, & alius adorandi creaturam, & alia ratio motiua, & ideo alia virtus directiua in hac & in illa. Aquin. 22. q. 103. ar. 3. [...] est quaedam species obseruantiae, quia per obseruantiam honoramos quascunque personas, dignitate prae cellentes. Albert 3. Dist. 9. ar. 6. Richard. ib. ar. 3. q. 1. Palud. ib. q. 2. Suares. d. [...], li. 2. c. 10. n. 8. Orationem quam ad sanctos [...], non esse actum a virtute Religionis [...] per se loquendo, sed a virtute Duliae, quam esse, distinctam a Religione, supra ostensum est., and not of Religion or Latria.

The place obiected out of S. Augustin. c. Faust. Manich. li. 20. c. 2 1, is made to speake that (by the Aduersarie) which the B holy father intendeth not: for he tearmeth not the honour ex­hibited by the true Church, to the persons of Martyrs, religi­ous: but he saith onely, Populus Christianus, memorias martyrum religiosa solemnitate concelebrat, Christian people celebrate the memorials of Martyrs, with religious solemnitie. And then ex­pounding himselfe in the progresse of the chapter, he deliuers two things:

First, that Christians honour Martyrs, with the honour of loue and societie, as holy men of God are honoured in this life Colimus Mar­tyres [...] cultu di­lectionis & socie­tatis, quo & in [...] vita, [...] Dei homines.: But Saints in this life are not worshipped with vowes, fastings, and religi­ous C prayer.

Secondly, he distinguisheth betweene the solemnities or fe­stiualls of Martyrs, and the persons of Martyrs: vpon the fe­stiualls Sacrificare [...] sacrificare Deo, in memorijs Martyrum. of Martyrs religious seruice was performed to God, the Lord of Martyrs, but not to the persons of Martyrs: S. Augu­stine affirmeth not this latter.

The totall honour which the sacred Scripture, and after it, S. Augustine requires to be yeelded to holy Saints, Martyrs, and Angels, respectiuely, may be reduced to foure heads: First, the D honour of loue Aug. c. Faust. Man. l. 20. c. 21. Co­limus ergo Mar­tyres, eo cultu di­lectionis & socie­tatis, quo & in hac vita coluntur san­cti homines Dei, quorum cor ad ta­lem pro Euangeli­ca veritate passio­nem, paratum esse [...], post incerta omnia superata, quanto etiam fidentiore laude praedicamus, iam in vita foeliciore [...] mista [...] pugnantes., and desire of societie. Secondly, recognition and prayses of their vertues and excellencie: Thirdly, imitati­on of their vertues, and godly examples: Fourthly, reuerent comportment to Angels, when they appeared, and were present as Gods messengers. But none of these actions are the formall or elicitiue actions of Religion: therefore the honour of Saints and Angells, (according to proprietie of speech) is [...] religi­ous worship. Now then I subsume, no religious worship (pro­perly taken) is due to Saints, by the confession of learned Pa­pists E [...]. 22. q. 83. ar. [...], a quo quaerimus obtinere quod [...], quia in hoc [...] autem [...] quos requirimus [...], inter pellatores nostros [...] Deum.. Inuocation of Saints is religious worship properly taken. Rom. 10.14. Ergo, Inuocation is not due to Saints.

IESVIT. A

Now that men may worship Angells and Saints in this sort, with true affection of spirit, euen to the prostration of their bodies, may be prooued out of holy Scripture, sup­posing what is already shewed, that they see our actions; for if Saints see our actions, wee may as lawfully and as profitably bow, kneele, and prostrate our bodies vnto them, as vnto Saints liuing on earth. But it is lawfull to honour liuing Saints with bowing, and kneeling, and prostration of B body: as may bee prooued by many examples. Abdias an holy man adored Helias prostrate on the ground, not for [...]. Reg. 18. any humane excellencie or respect, but because he was a Prophet, and a singular Saint of God. The children of the [...]. Reg. 2. Prophets, seeing signes of supernaturall and diuine power in Elizeus, comming vnto him, adored him prostrate on the ground. The Shunamite woman her sonne being dead, went presently vnto Elize us, fell downe at his feet, suing 4. Reg. 4. C not so much with words, as with teares and mournefull complaints, for the resuscitation of her dead sonne. We reade also that holy men haue adored, with kneeling and prostra­tion of their bodies, holy Angells appearing vnto them; as Abraham, Lot, Balaam, Iosua. So that this adoration of Saints and Angells, with more than humane and naturall Gen. 18. Gen. 19. Num. 22. Ioshua. 5. respect, and with acknowledgement of more than humane and naturall perfections in them, is cleerely deduceable D from holy Scriptures.

ANSVVER.

First, your supposall that Saints deceased, see and behold all our particular and singular actions, is in my praecedent answer refuted.

Secondly, if they did vnderstand our actions, it were not ne­necessarie for vs to worship them after your manner, because neither God himselfe, nor the blessed Saints require any such E deuotion Athan. d. [...]. Christ. pag. 547. Si Discipuli [...] Euangelio­rum, [...] loquamini contra Deum iniquitatem, sed per Scripturas incedite. Quod si diuersa a Scripturis fa­bulati vultis, [...] nobiscum concertatis, qui neque loqui neque audire [...] quod [...] sit ab istis, Dicente domino. Quod si vos manseritis in sermone meo [...] liberi [...], Quae igitur est ista vestrae immo­destiae vaerecordia, vt loquamini quae scripta non sunt..

[Page 325] Thirdly, your examples of Abdias and the Shunamite, pro­strating A themselues to Elyas and Elizeus, are not ad idem: for these Prophets were visibly and sensibly present to those per­sons; and on the contrarie, the blessed Saints are absent from those which worship them vpon earth; children kneele to their parents, and speake to them when they are present, but when they are absent, such actions cease.

Fourthly, your examples of Abraham, Lot, Balaam, and Iosua, conclude not your Angell-worship: for it is the common Te­net of the most learned Fathers, yea of many Pontificians Thyreus. d. Ap­parit. visib. lib. 1. c 23 Nec paucorum, nec obscurorum, nec nouorum ho­minum opinio est, &c. Euseb. Hist. li. 1. c. 2. Idem. d. Euan. demonstr. li. 1. cap. 5. Non is qui Abrahae innotuit Angelus, &c. Ambr. d. Abrah. li. 1. c. 5. Et. in Psal. 39. O­rig. Sup. losh. ho. 6. Et. Hom. 1. Sup. Esa. 6. Tertul. c. lud. C text. 114. Leo. Ep. 13. Concil. Sirmiens. apud Niceph li. 9. c. 31. Socrat. li. 1. c. 39. Sosomen. li. 4. c. 6. August. c. Adaman. Manic. Discip. c. 9. & in Conc. ad Catechum. aduers. Paganos, &c. [...]. 15. Rupert. d. vict. verb. Dei. li. 6. ca. 21. Chrys. in [...]. Hom.: 6. Theoph. in Act. 7. Cyril. Thesaur. li. 3. [...]. 1. Spiritu ergo ille Sancto ad veritatem Dogmatum du­ctus primo, Deum orat, vt pueros benedicat & simul etiam Angelū qui liberabat eum ex omnibus malis, vt per Deum patrem ipsum significaret, per [...] autem verbum patris, non enim ignorabat quia nomen [...] magni concilij Angelus est. [...]. d. vision. vet. Testam. vis. 6. Exod. ca. 3. con 2. [...]. 1. Athanas. orat. 2. c. Ar­rian. pag 165. Christus fuit quem Abraham in Tabernaculo, & Moses in Rubo adorauit., B That the Angell which Abraham and Ioshua worshipped, was the second person of the Trinitie. And the other Angells, Gen. 18. 2. and 19.1. Num. 22.31. were present in place, and did visibly and sensibly appeare to Abraham and the rest; and vpon that vision, they made outward obeysance to them, perceiuing they were diuine messengers. But did these or any other holy men, whose example is commended in holy Scripture, make outward obeisance, or offer prayers to Angells, when they were absent from them in heauen, or when they did not behold signes and euidences of their sensible apparition?

IESVIT.

Neither haue Protestants reason to stand against so ma­ny pregnant examples of Scriptures, vpon the one exam­ple D of the Angell in the Apocalypse, refusing to be adored of S. Iohn, saying, See thou doe it not, I am one of Apoc. 19. 10. thy fellow seruants, adore God: specially this place be­ing explicated long agoe by the Fathers, as not against the custome of Christian Saint-worship; for either the Angell so appeared, as S. Iohn tooke him to be God, and would haue adored him as God, whereof the adored was to be warned, as S. Augustine expoundeth; or rather the An­gell Corrigendus erat adorator. Aug. q. 91. in Gen. E forbad that worship, not as iniurious vnto God, but onely as cumbersome to himselfe, which I declare by this ex­ample, Suppose that one praise a Preacher to his face for an [Page 326] excellent sermon he hath made, and the Preacher out of mo­destie A saith, Praise not me, I am an vnworthy instrument of diuine wisedome, praise God the Author of all: This his speech doth not import that he thinkes to commend a Prea­chers sermon to be Idolatrie, and giuing away the glorie of God to a creature; but onely that modestie makes him wish that men would not praise him, but rather turne all the praise and glorie of that sermon vpon God. In this sort the Angell seeing the great and glorious friend of Iesus pro­strated B at his feet, requested him to rise vp, not condem­ning that adoration as Idolatrous, but refusing it as an action, though in regard of the offerer pious and godly, yet to him the receiuer cumbersome; which hee would not without some vnwillingnesse behold, in regard of the dig­nitie of the person hee saw prostrated before him. This is euidently gathered out of the sacred Text, seeing S. [...] af­ter this prohibition, did the second time offer the like honour C to the same Angell, which he would neuer haue done, had he not knowne adoration of Angells by mortall men to be pious Apoc. 22.8. and religious on their parts, howsoeuer the Angells some­times for iust respects may in modestie refuse it.

ANSWER.

It is said vntruely, and without any colour, that Protestants D stand against many pregnant examples of Scripture, &c. For the examples which are obiected, doe some of them belong to the person of Christ Iustin. Martyr. Dialog. cum Tryp. (Christus) Angelus siue nuntius voca­tur, [...] quod an­nuntiet mortali­bus, quaecunque annuntiari eis vult vniuersitatis fabri­cator, &c. Deum ipsum esse propheticus ibi sermo declarat. Ib. pag. 278. Magni Concilij Angelus, E &c. Ib. pa. 280. Christus, qui Dominus & Deus! Dei filius est, qui virtute prius apparuerat vt vir, & Ange­lus. Idem. Apol. 2. pa. [...]. Epiphan. Haeres. 5. n. 5. [...] Agust. [...] Trin. li. 3. c. 9. propter annunciationem, paternae ac suae voluntatis a Proph. dictus est Angelus. (as hath beene formerly shewed,) and the worship giuen to other Angells, and to the holy Prophets, was onely reuerence and outward obeisance Palud. 3. d. 9., when they were present in place and person; and wee deny not reuerent com­portment to holy Prophets and Angels, when they are perso­nally and visibly present.

But did the Church of the Iewes inuocate Elias or Elizeus, in their publike seruice, or did they offer any oblations to An­gels [Page 327] when they were absent, or to their Images? or to any of A the Patriarkes or Prophets, or to their Images, after these per­sons were defunct? If you could produce pregnant examples of this kinde, yea, so much as one example, then you might iustly say, Neither haue Protestants reason, &c. But you are, and will be as mute as a fish, in producing any one example to this purpose.

From the example of the Angell refusing to be worshipped, Apoc. 19.10. & 22.8, 9. we argue in this manner:

That which the Angel refused to admit when hee was present, B and came as an Ambassadour of Christ, is not to be giuen to bles­sed Saints and Angels when they are absent.

But the Angel refused a lesser degree of adoration, when hee was present, and came as an Ambassadour of Christ, than Papists yeeld to Angels and to blessed Saints being absent: Ergo, &c.

The Iesuit imagineth (but he prooueth nothing) either that Saint Iohn would haue exhibited diuine Adoration to the An­gell, C and for this reason his worship was refused, or that being modest and also feruent about his present imployment, he estee­med such worship vnmeet, to wit, at that present, rebus sic stan­tibus, and in regard of the extraordinarie dignitie of Saint Iohn, who was so great and glorious a friend of God.

The first solution is reiected by learned Papists themselues, Ribera Ribera. in A­poc. 19. v. 10. De adorationis genere [...] dubium esse debet quin ita ado­rare Iohannes vo­luerit vt Angelum adoraripar [...], id est non vt creatorem, sed vt creaturam. Non enim ignorabat, aut soli Deo dandam esse adorationem Latriae, aut Angelum eum esse qui loquebatur, vt initio libri, & sae pe postea dixit., Alchasar Al­chasar. ibid. [...] capite saltem 22. Ioannes [...] non [...], Angelum non esse Christum: [...] ipsemet Angelus ille antea [...], [...] tuus sum, & fratrum tuorum. Cum igitur tunc Ioannes, rursus ad eum ado­randum aggrediatur, argumento est, principio non eum adorare voluisse, quod Christum reputaret. Nec est cur Iohannem deceptum fuisse [...], cum potius ex textu [...] Ioannem agnouisse quisuam esset ille Ange­lus, ad cuius pedes procubuit: quippe de [...] ficut sibi [...] fuerat locutus dicens esse Angelum magnae pote­statis. c. 18. 1., Salmeron Salmeron. in Apoc. praelud. 7. pag. 367., Viegas Viegas. ibid. sect. 3., Mendoza Mendoza in li. 1. Reg. c. 2. num. 17. [...]. 19. Sect. 2. Ea adoratio non fuit ex [...] genere quae soli Deo debetur., &c. and it is apparant by the Text of the Reuelation, that S t. Iohn knew it was an Angel which spake to him, Apoc. 1.1. and Christ had many times reuealed so much to him. D

The second Answere, The Angel in modestie, &c. hath no­thing E at all in the Text to warrant it, but is voluntarily faigned by the Iesuite. First, Let him giue vs any the like example of such modestie, elsewhere in holy Scripture, vsed by any Angel. Secondly, His comparison, from a Preacher refusing to bee praised, &c. is altogether vnlike: for [...] adoration are [Page 328] actions of a diuers kinde; the one may be refufed in modestie A by a Preacher, a wayfaring man, for feare of vaine-glorie. But religious adoration is an vndue seruice for any creature, and must be refused in right. Neither doth any man when he prai­seth a Preacher, prostrate himselfe religiously. Also if religi­ous Adoration, had beene due to the Angel, why should he in modestie refuse it, because he was an immediate Ambassadour of Iesus Christ, and the admitting thereof would haue beene a leading case for posteritie, to teach them their dutie to Angels, if such dutie had belonged to them.

The third answere, The Angel refused adoration from S t. Iohn, B because of the dignitie of this great Apostle, is confuted by the Text, Apoc. 22.9. For the Angel yeelding a reason of his refusall, assignes a cause, which argueth, that such adoration was not due to him, from any other seruant of Iesus Christ, saying, [...], &c. See thou doe it not, for I am thy fellow seruant, and of thy brethren the Prophets, and of them which keepe the sayings of this Booke: worship God.

Hence it is manifest, that if the Angel refused religious wor­ship, because God alone is to bee worshipped in this manner, and because he was the fellow seruant Franc. Sonnius. Demonstr. Relig. tr. 11. cap. 12. Apoc. 22. Cum Iohannes Apost. Vellet ado­rare Angelum, re­uelantem, sibi my­steria respondit Angelus, vide ne faeceris. Conferuus enim [...] sum, &c. Ecce recusat Ange­lus adorationem Iohannis, co quod conseruus noster sit, habens eundem Deum, eundemque Christum commu­nem D nobiscum Dominum. of all iust persons: then C he refused not this worship, onely because of the speciall dig­nitie of S t. Iohn, but he would haue refused the like worship from any other Christian, as well as he did from him. Saint Ambrose Ambros. in Apoc. vis. 5. c. 19. Redemptio sanguinis Christi hoc [...] contulit, vt filij Dei socijque Angelorum efficerentur, ideoque pertimescit Angelus adorari ab homine, qui super se adora­bat hominem Deum. Quapropter conseruum se Iohannis, caeterorumque fidelium vocat. Greg. in [...]. ho. 8. Rupert. sup. Apoc. 19. Glossa. Haimo. ibid. Pannonius. Hugo Card. vpon the Reuelation, Chap. 19. saith, The Redemption of Christs Blood, brought this to the faithfull, that they should be made the sonnes of God, and companions of Angels: Therefore the Angel feared to be worshipped of a man, who worshipped one aboue him, which was God and man. To the like purpose also speaketh Ansbertus Ansbert. sup. [...]. I. 8. Hinc certe agendae sunt gratiae Redemptori omnium, quia natura illa quae dudum Angelos adorabat, nec prohibetur, iam per eius aduentum ab eis & adorari renuitur, & in nullo inferior iudicatur: & ne hanc [...] lo­hanni crederemus, cum ei idem Angelus dixisset vide ne feceris conseruus tuus sum, statim [...] ait, & fratrum tuorum habentium testimonium Iesu..

The Spirit of God (no doubt) foresaw the errours which would spring vp in future times Epiph. haer. 59. & Graec. 79. [...], &c., and therefore hee left vpon E Record, this remarkeable example in the Reuelation, to mani­fest his will, and to be an Antidotarie against the superstitious worship of Saints and Angels. And let men cauill, and descant vpon this Scripture as they please, It is euident from the same, that the Angel would admit no worship of himselfe: and hee [Page 329] draweth man to the immediate worshipping of Christ Cyprian. l. d. Bo­no. patient. rea­deth, Iesum Domi­num adora., Hee A doth not distinguish, saying, Worship me with religious wor­ship, as Gods friend: or, worship me, not as the prime foun­taine, and principall doner, or with Latria; but simply and with­out all distinction, he protesteth against this religious and sa­cred reuerence, saying, [...], Yeeld thy worship to God: As for me, [...], I am thy fellow seruant, and a fellow seruant, &c. [...], See thou do it not, let no other do it.

Lastly, If our Aduersaries will haue vs regard their distincti­ons, let them not (like spiders) spinne them out of their owne braines, but let them yeeld vs any Text or example in the new B Testament, wherein holy Angels Salineron. prae­lud. 7. in Apoc. Cum Angeli olim eius­modi honorem sibi ab hominibus exhi­beti solitum accep­tare consueuissent, &c. ex quo natura humana, per Christum Dei filium [...] exaltara & consors Diuinae naturae facta, caeperunt abstinere ab isto ho­nore recipiendo., or blessed Saints, or the blessed Virgin, liuing or defunct, did euer require or receiue, or our Sauiour, or any of his Apostles in their behalfe, did euer appoint such religious worship to bee yeelded vnto them, as Papists require.

IESVIT. § 4. C Praying vnto Saints, not iniurious vnto Gods mercie, but rather a commen­dation thereof.

THe fourth cause why Protestants out of their zeale vnto God, refuse to inuocate Saints, is, the high con­ceit of Gods mercie: for seeing he calleth all men im­mediately D to himselfe, Come vnto me all you that la­bour, Matth. 11. 18. and I will refresh you, We wrong his infinite good­nesse, in not approaching vnto him by Prayer, without the intercession of Saints.

This their zeale is not ioyned with science of the course of Gods mercifull prouidence, whose Diuine wisedome pre­scribeth certaine bounds, and as it were lawes to the infi­nitie of his mercies; which orders and prescripts whoso­euer E doth neglect, and yet hopes to obtaine fauours, hee doth not truely confide, but erroniously presume. God is in­finitly mercifull, and saith, Come to me all that labour; [Page 330] yet the man that should seeke to him for the remission of A sinnes, and would not submit himselfe to the Sacrament of water, should hope in vaine, and to no purpose challenge him of his promise, Come to me all: wherefore it im­ports vs verie much to know, and to vse those meanes of approching vnto God, that he hath appointed. Now, that the intercession of Saints is one meanes, without which God will not bestow many graces and fauours (as well spirituall as temporall) Christian Tradition doth deliuer B vnto vs; which Tradition is suitable with the bounti­full 1. Reg. 2. 30. Psal. 138.17. and noble disposition of God, which is not onely to honour and glorifie those that haue beene zealous of his honour, to the effusion of their bloud, but also to make the world know and vnderstand, that he doth honor them: for this knowledge, is both for his glorie, and also for the good of men; that seeing how highly God honoureth his con­stant friends, they be prouoked to indeauour by pure life to gaine his fauours. C

ANSWER.

First, our doctrine and zeale are grounded vpon diuine reue­lation, for we are commanded to inuocate God in the name of Christ, Iohn 16.24. and our Sauiour himselfe inuiteth vs, to ap­proach with confidence, to the throne of his grace, Ioh. 14.13. & cap. 15.16. & cap. 16.23.24.26. Eph. 3.12. Heb. 4.16. He is rich in mercie, to such as call vpon him, Eph. 2.4. and more D compassionate, better able, and more willing to helpe vs than any Saint or Angell, and he is appointed by God to be our in­tercessor, Rom. 8.34. Heb. 7.25. We read in the new Testament many examples of people which made supplication immedi­ately vnto Christ, but not of one which made intercession to the Virgin Marie, or to the blessed Saints or Angels. And the Fathers teach Chrys. Hom. d. profect. Euang. Vis dicere, quod etiam per nos ipsos oran­tes, apud Deū plus efficimus, quā dum alij pro nobis orant: [...] Cananaea, & vt accesserunt Discipuli dicunt dimitte eam, quià clamat post nos: & ad illos quidem dixit, Non sum missus nisi ad oues domus Israel, quando ipsamet accessit, & perseuerauit cla­mans, Domini etiàm catelli edunt de mensa Dominorum, [...] beneficium dedit, & ait fiat sicut tibi vis. Vides quo­modo repulit quando alij [...] vbi veto [...] pro dono clamauit, annuit. Id. sup. Math. Hom. 53., that we shall assuredly be heard, although no other pray for vs, but our selues, if we be deuout, faithfull, fer­uent, and perseurant, and conioine good Workes with our Prayers Aug. in Psal. 43. Quam caeleritèr accipiuntur orationes benè operantium. Idem d. Temp. ser. 226.. E

[Page 331] Secondly, But the Iesuit addeth, That by refusing to make A intercession to Saints, we neglect a necessarie meanes, which God hath appointed in his Church, for the applying of his graces and fauour; and that inuocation of Saints deceased, is such a meanes, he indeauoreth to prooue by vnwritten Tra­dition.

I answer, Inuocation of Saints is not grounded vpon Apo­stolicall Tradition. For the Iesuit cannot prooue (by the vnani­mous consent of the Fathers, abutting vpon the Apostles age, or by any other sufficient testimonie) that the Apostles prea­ched or practised this Doctrine. And if he were able to pro­duce B many Fathers, maintaining inuocation of Saints, yet he must remember, what one of the best learned of his owne part teacheth vs Paulus Naza­rius in 1. p. Tho. q. 113. ar. 2. Consen­sus Patrum in ali­quam veritaté, non conuincit eam esse Apostolicam Tra­ditionē, nisi in eam ità consentiant, vt asserant eam esse Apostolicam Tra­ditionem.: The consent of Fathers in any point (which they hold to be a veritie) prooueth not the same to be an Apostolicall Traditi­on, vnlesse they consent in such sort, that they affirme the same to be a Tradition. But our Aduersaries are vnable to produce the anti­ent Fathers, maintaining by vnanimous consent, this Doctrine, as matter of Catholicke Faith, or of necessarie practise: and they are farre more vnable to make ostension Peresius, d. Trad. p. 3. d. Cult. Sanct. Antè Cor­nelium martirem, nulla extat mentio (quod ego viderim) inuocationis & in­tercessionis Sācto­rum. In causa fortè fuit modestia & humilitas Apostolica., that Ignatius, Iustin Martyr, Ireneus, Tertullian, Clemens Alexandrinus, S. Cyprian, C or any other of the first three hundred yeares, did euer affirme, That inuocation of Saints is an Apostolicall Tradition. Tra­dition beginning in the holy Apostles, must descend by a perpetuall cur­rent of all ages Aug. c. Don li. 5. ca. 26. Quod nos admonet, vt ad fontem recurramus, id est, ad Apo­stolicam Traditionem, & indè canalem in nostra tempora [...], optimum est, & sine dubitatione facien­dum, &c. Basil. Hom. 28. c. Sabel. & Arian. Tho. Wald. Doctr. fid. lib. 2. ca. 19. Cassand. d. Offic. boni viri. Andrad. D Def. Trid. fid. lib. 2. Quae totius antiquitatis consensu firmata sunt.. Inuocation of Saints began not in the holy Apostles, neither is the same deriued to our daies, by a perpe­tuall current, and vnanimous consent, Ergo, The same is not grounded vpon Apostolicall Tradition.

IESVIT.

Jf reuealed Doctrine, comming by succession of Bishops from the Apostles to vs, will not alone winne beleefe, euen the Scriptures afford vs sufficient testimonie hereof. When Abimelech king of Gezara had offended God, by taking away from Abraham his wife Sara, and penitent of the E fact (though committed but in ignorance) sought for par­don, did not God himselfe send him vnto Abraham, say­ing, Cen. 20. v. 8. Restore his wife vnto the man, for he is a Pro­phet, [Page 332] and he will pray for thee, and thou shalt liue. A By which example, we see, that Gods infinit mercie, who saith, Come to me all, will not many times bestow fauours and graces without intercession of his Saints, that men may know he loues and respects his friends. When he was offended against Eliphaz and his companions, did hee not send them vnto his fingularly beloued seruant Iob, that he might be a Mediator for them? Ite ad seruum meum Iob 42. v. 8. Iob, & offerte holocaustū pro vobis, Iob autem seruus B meus orabit pro vobis, faciem eius suscipiam, vt non vobis imputetur stultitia. Out of which place, two things are cleerely gathered: First, that though Gods mercy be infinite, yet many times he will not grant our prayers, but in such manner as he will make vs beholding to his Saints: Secondly, that we ought to prostrate our prayers vnto him, as with great confidence in his goodnesse, so likewise with a most feeling humble distrust of our owne C worthinesse, which affection cannot but mooue vs to seeke the intercession of them we know to be most highly grati­ous in his fauour; so that vpon pretence of Gods great mercie to reiect the mediation of Saints, is zeale without science, deuotion not throughly instructed about the lawes and orders that God hath prescribed vnto his measure­lesse mercie, by his imcomprehenfible wisdome. Andif we greeue to humble our selues vnto Saints, and repine at D Gods prouidence, that he will not many times grant our supplications without honouring his Saints, and making vs bound vnto them, we may iustly expect to heare what hee said to one in like case, Friend I do thee not wrong; May Math. 20.15. I not dispence my mercies as I please? if I will be­stow them in such sort, as to ioine together with thy good, the honour of my friends, Is thine eye euill because I am good, and courteous to them that haue loued mee more than their owne life? E

ANSWER.

First, If you had reueiled Doctrine comming from the Apostles by succession, the same would merit beleefe: but [Page 333] your present Doctrine of inuocation of Saints, &c. is not re­ueiled A by the holy Ghost, neither can the same be reduced to the Apostles Peres. Ayala. d. Trad. p. 3. d. Cult. Sanct. pa. 140. Antè Cornelium Martirem, nulla extat mentio (quod ego viderim) inuocationis, & intercessionis Sanctorum. Horant. lo. Cath. lib 3. ca. 21. Sub Euangelio inuocatio Sanctorum explicitè praecepta non est..

Secondly, Examples of Scripture, Gen. 20.17. Iob. 42.8. prooue indeed, that when God himselfe by a precept appoints a meanes whereby sinners must seeke his fauour, the same meanes is necessarie, or else the end cannot be obtained. But where hath God appointed inuocation of Saints deceased to B be such a meanes?

Thirdly, Abimelech and Iobs friends did not inuocate Abra­ham or Iob, but at the most (which notwithstanding is not ex­pressed in the Text, Gen. 20.7.17. Iob 42.8.9.) requested their prayers, and sacrifice to God for them, whiles these Prophets were conuersant in the world, and were Gods Ministers and Priests, appointed by him to make intercession for themselues and others, Heb. 6.1. It may be also, that herein they were fi­gures of Christ Glossa. Inter­linear. sup. Gen. 12. [...]. sup. Gen. 18. Lauret. Sylu Alle­gor. ver. Abraham..

Whiles Priests and Prophets were liuing, and conuersant C with men on earth, God commanded his people to aske coun­sell of them, and to seeke wisdome at their mouth, Malach. 2.8. and to intreat their prayers. But when Moses and Aron were deceased, did he then appoint his people to do the like, or did any man set vp Altars or Temples, in honour of them, and re­paire vnto the same, intreating to be taught by them, or to be holpen by their merits or prayers? The Argument therefore which the Aduersarie maketh, from the liuing to the dead Bellar. d. sanct. Beat. li. 1. c. 19. At­què hoc Argumen­tú Aduersarij nun­quam soluere po­tuerunt., is of no greater force than these which follow. Children may lawfully, and with successe, craue food and raiment of their pa­rents, D whiles they be liuing. Ergo, Children may doe the like, when their parents are defunct. A parishioner may request his Pastor, whiles he is liuing, to instruct him, or to absolue him. Ergo, he may pray to him, to instruct and absolue him when he is dead. When a mans office ceaseth, the actions of his office surcease: but when men depart this life, their office which they exercised in the world ceaseth, their actions there­fore depending vpon their office, do also cease. Now I sub­sume, to pray for people distinctly, and in particular, depen­deth E vpon the calling and office of men whiles they are li­uing, but when they are defunct, this calling and office ceaseth. Or if they denie this, let the Aduersaries prooue the contrarie by diuine Reuelation: therefore although Abraham and Iob prayed for Abimelech, and Eliphas, &c. whilest Abraham and [Page 334] Iob liued, and although Abimelech and the rest must by Gods A Precept be holpen by their Prayers, yet it followeth not from hence, that the liuing ought to make intercession to the Saints deceased.

Verily he that reades this Section of the Iesuit, may well wonder and aske, Whether such discoursors euer beleeued or heard, that the Sonne of God was incarnate, that he is our Ad­uocate, and that by him we haue accesse to the Throne of grace, [...] Or that the holy Ghost hath left a manifest and certaine rule of Prayer in the Church; considering, that these men are so presumptuous, vpon their owne friuolous surmises, to pre­scribe a forme of religious Inuocation? B

IESVIT. § 5. Inuocation to Saints, not an iniurie, but an honour to Christ the only Mediator. C

ANother shew of pietie pretended against Prayer vn­to Saints, is, that it seemes to ouerthrow the Media­torship of Christ, which S. Paul commends, as onely, vnus Mediator Dei & hominum Christus Iesus. But 1. Tim. 2.3. in shewing the inanitie of this shadow, I shall not need to be long, seeing this respect would make vs also neglect, and not vse the mediation of liuing Saints, out of feare of dis­anulling the onely Mediatorship of Christ. It is no more D against the honour of the onely Mediatorship of Christ, to pray vnto Saints deceased, than vnto Saints liuing: yea, the praying vnto these kind of Saints, may seeme more dishonor­able, these being imprisoned in mortalitie, militant in dan­gers, and not wanting some blemishes and defects; where­as the other Saints are glorious, pure from any the least imaginable spot, settled in the consummation of ineffable blisse. But the Scripture allowes, yea, commands Prayer E Rom. 15. 30. Iob 42.8. vnto liuing Saints, and consequently, praying vnto them is not iniurious vnto the onely Mediatour Christ: There­fore the praying vnto Saints deceased, that are in glory [Page 335] with God, is not iniurious vnto the onely Mediatourship of A Christ.

ANSWER.

Our argument which you tearme an emptie shadow, will not so lightly be shaken as you imagine: for if Christ Iesus alone, in the state of the new Testament, is the Mediatour, both of re­demption and intercession, then no Saint liuing or deceased is a Mediatour, &c. But the first is true, because God hath consti­tuted Christ to be a Mediatour, and he hath appointed no other B Saint, liuing or defunct to be so. Ergo

Christ Iesus alone in the state of the new Testament, is the Mediatour of Redemption and Intercession.

Then I subsume Papists make Saints deceased partial: Media­tours, to wit, of Intercession Bellar. d. Sane. Beat. [...]. c. 20. Po­stremo modo, eti­am [...] mediatores, inter Deum & eos pro quibus orant. Neque est curtimeamus, nomen mediatoris transfer­re ad Sanctos, [...] ad eos transferrimus nomen Aduocati & intercessoris, quae Christo [...] Rom. [...]. & 1. Ioh. 2. Biel. in Can. [...]. lect. 30. K. Non ergo frustra imploramus Sanctos quos non vt Creatores gra­tiae siue Beatificatoresinuocamus, sed vt Mediatores, quorum meritis & intuitu nobis Deus [...] quam ex C nostris accipere sumus minus digni. Jdem. Ex quibus patit preces nostras spem que consequendae [...] per mediatores Sanctos in coelo, inanes non esse: sed ordine a Deo instituto, nos ad eorum auxilia [...] debere, [...] debita veneratione eos semper implorare, vt saluemur [...] meritis, atque votis.. Therefore they yeeld some part of Christ (the sole Mediatour) his office vnto Saints.

The Iesuit answereth, by distinction of Mediatour, princi­pall, and subordinate, or dependent, saying: That they appoint no Saints Medtatours of the first kind, but onely of the second: And that this is no iniurie to Christ, or encroachment on his office, but an honour to him, and a meanes to apply, or make his Mediation effectuall to vs; and he vseth certaine Paralogismes to conclude this.

First, the Scripture (saith he) allowes, and commands pray­er D to liuing Saints, &c. but these are not iniurious but honoura­ble to Christ.

It is answered, That vnlesse the Iesuit aequiuocate, the Scrip­ture commandeth not inuocation of liuing Saints, but onely the requesting of their charitie and prayers to God for men, Rom. 15.30. Eph. 6.19. Col. 4.3. 1. Thes. 5.25. Heb. 13.18. But the li­uing are present and conuersant with the liuing, they conioyne their common prayers, Vt deum quasi manufacta, praecationibus ambiant (saith Tertul. Apol. c. 39.) That going to God hand in hand they may intreat him. Besides, inuocation and prayer properly ta­ken, E praesuppose in them wee pray vnto, vnderstanding the thoughts and motions of the heart: and all religious prayer is a mentall action vnderstood by him, whom men deprecate. But the liuing Saints vnderstand not the secrets of each others [Page 336] hearts: Therefore, speaking properly, no man prayeth to li­uing A Saints. Also religious prayer is a Communication with God Chrys. d. Orat. li. 1. Vere cum Dco cōfabulamur, quo­ties vacamus de­precationi. Si qui cum Caesare mis­cent sermones, &c. Multo minus fieri potest vtqui Deum deprecantur, cum co familiariter col­loquétes, &c. Aug. Psal. 85. Oratio tua locutio est ad De­um, &c. Chrys. in Genes. Ho. 30. O­ratio Colloquium est cum Deo., and a proper worship of God, and an action of Latria Palud. 4. d. 15. q. 5. n. 4. Gabr. Can. Miss. lect. 61. I. Antonin. Sum. Mor. p. 4. Tit. 5. c. 8. §. 2.. Lastly, no precept, or example is extant in holy Scripture, proo­uing that iust persons did at any time pray to liuing Saints being absent, or to liuing Saints, by Collets, or set formes of publike deuotion, in such manner as Romists doe to Saints deceased. As for petition or request (which is all the Scripture mentions) the same is onely generall and materiall in prayer: and there­fore we cannot conclude affirmatiuely, saying, They made re­quest to the Saints liuing, to assist them with their prayers. Er­go, B they did inuocate and make religious prayers to them, any more, then we may conclude, It is a liuing creature. Ergo, it is a man; It hath one act of prayer, Ergo, it is Prayer; It is a promise, therefore it is a vow, &c.

If it be replyed, The requesting of the liuing to pray for vs, and their supplication according to this request, is not iniurious to Christs office, &c. Ergo, Our Inuocation of Saints deceased, is no iniurie, &c.

We answer: That as in humane and ciuill affaires, it is an in­iury C to the supreame Magistrate for any of his Subiects to con­stitute a master of Requests, preferring their suites vnto him without his authoritie: so likewise, it is an iniurie to Christ our Mediatour, for vs men which are wormes of the earth, with­out warrant and Commission from Gods word, to constitute Saints and Angells, Mediatours of our prayers. And when the Lord of heauen hath giuen vs an all-sufficient Aduocate, and withall hath prescribed the meanes, by which we must haue ac­cesse vnto this Mediatour: is it not wicked presumption in man, to cancell this sacred ordinance, and to appoint other meanes D of his owne deuising? S. Cyprian saith Cypr. d. orat. Dom n. 1. Aliter o­rare quam docuit, non ignoratio sola sit, sed & culpa: quando ipse posu­erit & dixerit, reijcitis mandatum Dei, vt traditio­nem vestram statuatis.: For men to pray other­wise than the Lord hath taught, is not onely ignorance, but iniquitie: for he hath said, Ye reiect the Commandement of God, that you may establish your own tradition. And Tertullian Tertul. d. orat. c. 12. quibus merito vanitas exprobranda est, siquidem sine vllius aut Dominici, aut Apostolici praecepti authoritate fiunt., They are iustly reproa­ched with vanitie, because (in prayer) they doe this without any war­rant from Christ or his Apostles.

In the Court of heauen, he which appoints the supreame, E appoints the subordinate; and as no creature may assume, so no creature may yeeld, either supreame or subordinate iurisdicti­on to any, in things of this nature, besides, or without Commis­on from the highest. Therefore the distinction of Mediatours [Page 337] into supreame and secondarie, founded vpon mans owne In­uention, A freeth not the Inuentors from impietie against God and Christ, but is such, as if a mortall man should imagine subordinate Creators, Inspirators, yea, subordinate Gods: for the Apostle conioyneth these two as like, One God, one Me­diator, &c. 1. Timoth. 2. 4, 5.

IESVIT.

I adde, That to make Saints Mediators subordinate vnto, and dependent of Christ, is to encrease his glorie. B For first, If onely Christ Jesus is worthie to haue immedi­ate accesse vnto God, and all other Saints, Men, and An­gels, be Mediators and Intercessors, not hauing accesse vnto God, but by him; then certainely, that Saints medi­ate and intercede for vs, is exceeding glorious vnto Christ Iesus. But Catholikes teach, That Saints be such Inter­cessors, Heb. 7.25. as haue no accesse vnto God, but through Christ Jesus, by mediation of his Merit, Passion, and Death; C there being no other Name in Heauen, or Earth, by which Act. 4.12. wee are to be saued. Ergo, &c.

ANSVVER.

In words, and outward pretext, you allow vnto Saints subordinate Mediation onely; but your practise sheweth, that you make them principall Cassand. Con­sult. d. Inuoc. Sanct. D Homines non mali certos sibi sanctos tanquam Patronos & Turores delegerunt, in eorum [...] atque Inter­cessione plusquam in Christi Merito fiduciam posuerunt, atque adeò vnico illo Aduocationis Christi Officio obscurato Sanctos, atque imprimis Virginem Matrem in illius locum substituerunt: [...] non defuerunt viri etiam celebres qui assererent, id quod Hester, Assuero, [...] se petenti dimidium regni daturum in Maria comple­tum esse in quam Deus [...] sui, quod iudicio & misericordia constat, dimidium hoc est [...] transtu­lerit, altera regni parte sibi [...]: hinc illi [...] passim Virgini tributi Regina Coeli, [...] est Mater mi­sericordiae, vita spes nostra lux [...] Aduocata & Mediatrix. [...] etsi [...] interpretationem admit­tant ca tamen non semper omnibus praesertim rudibus & imperitis [...]. Quid quod totum Psalterium sub­lato vbique Domini nomine in nomen Dominae commutatum legitur. Sedul. [...]. [...]. Traject. cap. 1. Casta Virgo Dei, Genitrix Maria, &c. vnica spes Patrum, [...] Prophetarum, Praeconium Apostolorum, &c. Sub tua tutela & protectione toti sumus. Da verbum cordi quae mundo dedisti [...], da quod piè institui foeliciter exequi. Idem, cap. 18. [...] Virgo in te Angeli [...], iusti gratiam, peccatores veniam inue­nerunt in aeternum Mentò in te [...] totius [...], &c. Idem, cap. 21. Tu vnica apud Deum Christianorum, spes nostra es [...] & sanctissima; cui gloria & honor, decus atque imperium in sempi­terna E saecula saeculorum. Per te accessum habemus ad Filium, O benedicta [...] gratiae, genetrix vitae Mater salutis: vt per te nos suscipiat qui per [...] datus est nobis. [...] tua culpam no­strae corruptionis: & humilitas Deo grata [...] veniam [...]. [...] Charitas tua nostrorum cooperiat multitudinem peccatorum, & [...] gloriosa foecunditatem nobis conferat Meritorum. Do­mina nostra, Mediatrix nostra, Aduocata nostra tuo Filio nos commenda, tuo Filio nos praesenta. Mediators (at least) to [Page 338] Christ Corona. B. Virg. Mariae, c. 2. Sicut ergo Christus, est Mediator inter De­um & hominem, sic beata Virgo inter filium suum & hominem. Vnde in persona ipsius Salomon dixit Matri, 3. Reg. 2. Pete mater [...] quod vis, neque enim fas est, &c. Item in Deuteronomio dicit Dominus, Ego percutiam & B. Virgo tanquam Mediatrix respon­det, & ego sanabo.: and in your prayers to them, you say to them, Let A your abundant Charitie couer our sinnes, Let thy integritie excuse our corruption: Thou, [...] B. Virgin, art the onely hope of the Patriarchs, the glorie of the Prophets, the solemne crie of the Apostles, &c.

And yet if your practise were according to your distinction, you were transgressors: for that which is giuen to another, without commission from Christ, is taken from him. And B Subiects may as well fet vp a Viceroy or subordinate King in a Commonwealth, as Christians appoint new Mediators, without Christ his Word. Also, when Christ himselfe hath prescribed the meanes whereby he will be honoured, and by which his people shall be saued, mens holy-seeming Inuenti­ons, repugnant or diuerse from these, are no honour to Christ, but an offence, Matth. 15.9. Lastly, when the holy Scripture teacheth vs, that there is one Creator, and one Redeemer; it is impietie for man to honour any other, vnder the name of a subordinate Creator and Redeemer. So likewise, when the C same Scripture teacheth but one Mediator of Intercession, it is impietie to honour Creatures vnder the name of secondarie and subordinate Mediators of Intercession; because wee haue no Diuine Authoritie to warrant vs in the latter, more than in the former. For if our Aduersaries say, that Diuine Authori­tie hath appointed the Saints liuing, and the glorified Saints, secondarie Mediators of Intercession, they are vnable to de­monstrate this: for liuing Saints are onely ioint Suitors, and in crauing mercie for their brethren, they doe withall deprecate D their owne sinnes, and craue the same deliuerance from punish­ments and calamities, &c. being still fellow-prisoners in the same Cottage of mortalitie and frailetie. These and the like respects doe so abate all suspition of presumption, to dignifie their prayers with any Mediatorship, that this can in no sort encroach vpon Christs Office. But in the glorified Saints, there are many personall eminencies of estate and degree in glorie, which our rashnesse or weakenesse is ouer-prone to mis-imploy or mistake. And this, among other, may be a cause, why the wisdome of God sendeth vs not to be suitors to the glorious E Saints in Heauen, but commandeth vs to craue the ioint pray­ers of our brethren on Earth, which are still tossed in the same Sea of miserie and infirmitie with vs.

IESVIT. A

Whence I inferre, That Protestants mistake our Do­ctrine, when they say we teach, That Saints are fellow Mediatours with Christ, and that we bring them to sup­ply the defect of his intercession, that otherwise would not be sufficient. This we doe neither teach, nor beleeue, but that the merits of Christ are infinite, euery drop of his precious Blood, able to pay the full ransome of a million of B worlds: that the Saints mediate and intercede for vs vn­to Christ, is for his greater glory, by whose merits they are made worthie of that dignitie, and whom by their Interces­sions they acknowledge to bee the fountaine of all good that comes vnto mankinde.

ANSVVER.

If the Intercession of Christ, according to Diuine Ordi­nance, C is sufficient in it selfe, vpon the liuely Faith and Prayers of Saints militant, without our inuocation of the Saints tri­umphant, to apply the benefit of his Passion to the faithfull; and if Saints deceased are not appointed by the reuealed word of Christ, to be secondarie Mediatours: then the Inuocation of Saints deceased, is vnlawfull, and derogatorie to Christs Inter­cession.

But the first is true: First, None of the faithfull in the whole Historie of the New Testament, did inuocate Saint Stephan or Saint Iames, or any other Saint deceased, that they might D by these meanes, haue the Passion or intercession of Christ applied vnto them; and yet many of these, to wit, all faithfull and iust persons were saued.

Secondly, Our Sauiour himselfe, or his Apostles, ordained not any such meanes, either for procuring and applying of Christs Intercession, or for the honouring of his Saints. And this argu­eth, both that the Inuocation of Saints is a voluntarie deuo­tion, and also a vertuall or interpretatiue derogation, from the Intercession of Christ, and from the other meanes, which hee hath sanctified, and an vndue meanes of honouring the Saints E deceased.

IESVIT. A

Jf it be a glorie to a roote of a tree, to haue many boughes and branches laden with excellent fruit, the Saints being but branches of Christ Iesus, the true Vinetree, surely the Iohn 15.1, 5. honour of all their merits springs originally, and is referred finally vnto him: and as it is impossible to honour and praise the boughes, without honouring and praising of the roote: so likewise it is not possible that Catholikes who acknow­ledge B that Saints haue all their grace, merit, and fauour with God, from Christ Iesus, should honour them, and pray vnto them without honouring Christ, and without praying euer finally vnto him.

ANSWER.

It is an honour to Christ the true Vine, to haue many fruit­full Branches, Ioh. 15.8. And when we honour the branches, in C a lawfull manner, we glorifie Christ their roote: but inordinate honour of Saints is repugnant, both to the honour of Christ himselfe, and of his Saints.

IESVIT.

Wherefore Saints pray for vs, that God would forgiue vs our sinnes, grant vs fauours that helpe vs towards eternall life, not for their merits, but for the merits of Christ. And when the Fathers in their Prayers alledge vn­to D God the merits of Saints, this is because their merits make them gracious in Gods sight, and worthie that the graces they craue for vs, be granted vnto vs; not by the application of their merits, but onely through the application of the me­rits of Christ. Put case that a Prince should ransome a great multitude of his subiects taken prisoners, and held in miserable thraldome, paying for them a sufficient and abun­dant ransome, yet so that none should haue the fruit of that E Redemption, but those whom the King should singularly chuse and make worthie of that fauour. Suppose that some Noble man in the Court (whom his merits made gracious with the King) should by his intercedings obtaine, that the [Page 341] benefit of that ransome should bee extended to some one A whom hee particularly affects: surely this Captiue should be redeemed and deliuered, through the ransome paid by the King, not by the merits of the Noble man interceding for him, whose merits concurred thereunto onely remotely, and afarre off. To apply this similitude, Christ Iesus hath paid an abundant price for mans Redemption, yet none inioy the benefit thereof, but they to whom by especiall grace he apply­eth the same. Sinners beseech him by the merits of Saints, B that made them gracious in his sight, that he will vouchsafe to apply the merit of his Passion vnto them, for the obtai­ning of fanours conducing vnto eternall life; Christ grants their Petition and request, and thereupon applies his merits vnto them. These men cannot be properly said to be saued through the merits of Saints, but only through the merits of Christ, specially because euen the merits of Saints that con­curred thereunto, proceed originally from the merits of C Christ.

ANSWER.

First, You are ignorant of the manner, and particular matter, of Saintly Intercession; and it is more than you can prooue, that blessed Saints pray expresly and distinctly for the remission of mens particular sinnes.

Secondly, Blessed Saints by their Intercession in heauen can merit nothing for themselues or others, for they are not in the D state of meriting, but of possessing the full reward promised to their labours: neither can they apply their former merits to o­ther men, because they themselues haue reaped the full reward of them: and how can the merits of a creature being finite, and already requited beyond their desert and dignitie, be imputed to others?

Your similitude of a King, is nothing to the purpose, because the ground whereupon you build it is false: Kings grant fauours and pardons, for the merits and intreatie of such as are gracious in their sight, but God bestoweth his graces and pardons, for E the sole merit and intercession of Christ; and we are sufficient­ly qualified on our owne part to receiue his benefits, when we performe that which himselfe requireth, and vse the meanes which he appointeth. But it is not yet prooued, that Inuocation of Saints is in the number of those meanes.

IESVIT. §. 6. A How it is lawfull to appropriate the obtai­ning of Graces and Cures vnto Saints.

OVr Aduersaries finding our inuocation of Saints, for substance practised in Gods Church, euer since the primatiue times, take exceptions at some cir­cumstances B thereof, which they thinke new, and not iusti­siable by antiquitie: which are principally three, whereon are grounded other three causes of Protestants dislike.

ANSWER.

IF inuocation of Saints hath not beene practised vniuersally in Gods Church, euer since the Apostles times, then the same is not Catholicke Vinc. Lir. c. Haer. c. 4. Quicquid non vnus aut duo tantùm, sed omnes [...] vno [...] consensu, aper­tè, frequenter, per­seuerantèr, tenuis­se, scripsisse, docuis­se cognouerit., or originally diuine Tertul. d. prae­script. c. 21. Quod ecclesia ab Aposto­lis Apostoli à Chri­sto, Christus à Deo suscepit.: therefore you trifle, C and beg the question Arist. Topic. lib. 8. ca. 13. [...]., when you declame, saying, Our Aduer­saries finding our inuocation of Saints for substance practised in Gods Church euer since the Primatiue times. First, you dare not say euer since the Apostles times, but you equiuocate in the tearme of Primatiue. Secondly, you leaue out Vniuersally, for you cannot demonstrate, that the same was practised in all Chur­ches, or maintained generally by the Fathers. Thirdly, you seeke an euasion by a distinction of Substance, & Circumstance, and acquaint vs not, what shall be of the one, and what of the other: publicke and priuate, freely, and of necessitie, may be D circumstances, yet they are such circumstances, as varie the state of the question: and Protestants dispute against your present doctrine, and manner of inuocation, which hath neither ground in the Apostles doctrine, nor in the Tradition of the antient Church.

IESVIT.

The first of these circumstances whereupon they E ground the sixt reason of their dislike, is, that we distribute amongst Saints, offices of curing diseases, and seeke some kind of fauour of one, some of another; of which practise [Page 343] there is no example in Antiquitie, yea it seemes to resemble A the leuity of Heathenish superstition, who did multiplie gods, according to the multitude of the things they thought to ob­taine of them. I answer, that to seeke some fauours by the in­tercession rather of one Saint than another, was the iudge­ment of the Fathers in S. Austines time, which he himselfe Aug. Epist. 137. did practise vpon this occasion. In the towne of Hippo, one of the familie of S. Augustine, accused a Priest of an hai­nous crime, making his accusation good by oath, which the B other did reiect, in like manner purging himselfe by oath. The fact being open and scandalous, seeing (of necessitie) the one of them was periured, S. Augustine sent them both into Jtalie to the Shrine of S. Foelix at Nola, at whose reliques periured persons were vsually discouered:

In defence of which fact, he writes an Epistle to his people of Hippo, allowing of this proceeding to seeke recourse ra­ther to one Saint than another, wondring at the secret pro­uidence of God therein: ‘Although saith he, men by experi­ence C see this to be true, yet who is able to discouer the coun­sell of God, why in some place such miracles are done, in others they are not? For is not Africa stored with shrines of blessed Martyres, and yet do we not know any such my­racles to be done here by their intercessions? For seeing (as the Apostle saith) all Saints haue not the gift of curing diseases, nor all the knowledge to discerne Spirits: so like­wise at the shrines of all Martyres, these things are not D done, because He will not haue them euery where done, who giueth to euery one particular gifts, according to his pleasure.’

ANSVVER.

To impose offices vpon Saints deceased, and to attribute cures, deliuerances, opitulations, power, and actions to them, vpon mans owne imagination, and to persuade people which E ought to seeke vnto God, Psal. 121.2. Esa. 8.17. 1. Sam. 17.37. to depend vpon creatures in their perils and aduersitie (chang­ing the names onely) is Heathenish superstition. And what doe Papists else in substance, when they make Saints (yea some per­haps, [Page 344] which are in Hell) particular regents Biel. in Can. Miss. Lect. 32. Etiàm in Sanctis verū est illud Virgilianum, Non omnia possu­mus omnes. Non enim omnia omni­bus data sunt, sed diuersi diuersa re­ceperunt: vt quod scribit Gerson. d. O­rat. & valor. eius. n. 77. lit. Y. Ad aliqué Sanctorum te con­vertas, pro necessi­tatibus quibuslibet subleuādis, vel pro impetranda specia­li quadam gratia, qua sanct' vel san­cta [...] quoddam donū re­cepisse memoratur diuisiones enìm gratiarum sunt, si­cut tradit Aposto­lus, quod verum est, nedum de viatoribus; sed etiàm de beatis, sub quo [...] canit Ecclesia de quolibet Sanctorum, non est in­uentus C similis illi. Salmeron. tom. 15. disp. 7. in 1. [...]. 2. Sancti non opitulantur omnibus aequalitèr. Nàm sunt aliqui, qui in [...], peculiaritèr opem ferunt, & [...] etiàm quibus in hac vita ob accepta benificia, particulari ratione tenebantur. Hinc Hispani peculiaritèr colunt B. Iacobum; Sebastianum, Lucitani; Romani, [...] & Paulum; Florentini, Iohannem [...], [...], Marcum; Senenses, B. [...]; Galli, Dionisium; Germani, Barbaram; [...], [...] & [...], &c. Ib. Haec multiformis mu­nerum distributio, partìm à Deo inspirata, partim [...] est per [...], partìm pijs coniecturis deprehensa, & praecipuè in illis rebus [...], quas ipsi [...] sunt. Ità inuocamus Petrum in vinculis, Paulum in con­uersione, vtrunquè in periculis maris; Iohannem Bapt in natiuitate; Euangelistam, in colenda Virginitate; Sebastianum & [...], in peste depelienda; Antonium, in igne abercendo, & rebus amissis inueniendis, & si­milibus alijs plerisquè. of countries, cities, A religious orders, yea of the elements, fire, water, &c. and of beasts, &c. when they appoint vnto them distinctly, and by name, seuerall opitulations: Apollonia, is for the tooth ach; Oti­lia, for bleared eyes; S. Rochus, for the poxe; Erasmus, for the iliake passion; Blasius, for the quinsie; Petronella, for feauers; S. Wendeline, is for sheepe and oxen; S. Antonie, for hogs; S. Ger­trudis, for mice and rats; S. Nicholas, is the patrone of sailers; S. Clement, of bakers; S. George, of horsemen; S. Eulogius, of smiths; S. Luke, of painters; S. Cosmas, of physitians, &c. There is no doubt but that this base superstition was deriued B from the Pagans, (although it be now varnished and mantled by Papals, with the habit of deuotion) for S. Augustine d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 4. cap. 22. saith, That Varro maintained, it was profitable to know the power, and working of euerie god in particular, that men might be able to sue vnto them, according to their seueral offices, for euerie distinct or particular benefit, least otherwise they might aske water of Bacchus the god of wine, or wine of the Nymphs, goddesses of water.

But our Aduersarie blusheth not to say, That the former do­ctrine and practise, is sutable to the iudgement of the Fathers, and that S. Augustine maintained the same. D

First, I conceiue, that by Fathers he vnderstandeth the Tri­dent Fathers; for could he haue named antient Fathers, no doubt we should haue had them.

As for the narration out of S. Augustine, Epist. 137. it falleth short of prouing the question in hand. For no mention is made concerning inuocation of S. Foelix the Martyr, nor of any vowes or oblations presented to him. Neither was the disco­uerie of the fact (mentioned in that Epistle) required to be made by the Martyr, but it was intended to be sought from E God himselfe, at the sepulchre of the Martyr. Also, after the suspected persons returned from Nola, the matter hung still in suspence, and consequently nothing was effected about the discouerie Aug. Ep. 137. [...] Presbiteri, proptereà non au­sus sum de numero collegarum eius vel deprimere, vel de­lere, nè diuinae po­testati, sub cui' ex­amine causa adhuc pendet, facere vi­derer iniuriam, si illius iudicium, [...] vellem iudicio prae­uenire.. But if any speciall myracle had beene wrought in those daies, at the Martyres tombe, the same is to be ranked [Page 345] among things extraordinarie, from which a Catholicke, and A perpetuall doctrine or practise cannot be concluded: for one swallow maketh not a Summer, and from miraculous and ex­traordinarie actions, one cannot inferre a generall and perpe­tuall practise for all ages, as appeareth by the poole of Bethes­da. Ioh. 5.4. and the riuer of Iordan, Kings vlt. cap. 5.14.

IESVIT.

This being a Doctrine taught by the learnedest Father Christianitie bred, by him grounded on Scripture, and on B the vnsearchable course of the diuine prouidence, neuer censured nor condemned by any Father; we need not feare superstition in seeking some kind of fauors and benefits by the peculiar intercession of certaine Saints.

ANSVVER.

S. Augustine hath nothing in the former place which main­taineth the seeking of special benefits and fauours, by the pecu­liar C intercession of certaine Saints; he hath no word concerning the particular protection, patronage, gouernement, offices, or deliuerance wrought by Saints deceased Gerhard. loc. to. 8. d. Mort. n. 353. Germania venera­batur Martinum, & Georgium Cata­phractū, Hispania, Iacobum; Gallia, Michaelem & Dionysium; Vngaria, Ludouicum; Polonia, Stanislaam; Moscouia, Nicho­laum; Heluetia, Virginem Mariam in Nigricante Silua Eremitarum locum habentem; Anglia, Thomam & Gregorium; Scocia, Andream; Bohemia, Wenceslaum; Suecia, Brigittam, &c. Franci colebant Cilianum; Thu­ringi, Bonifacium; Hassi, Elizabetham; Misnici, Donatum, Bauari, Wolffgangum; Austriaci, Florianum; Ca­rinthij, D Rupertum, Borussi, Albertum; Pomerani, Othonem; Sueui, Conradum, &c. Magdeburgensi Episcopatui praefectus erat Mauritius; Halberstadensi, Stephanus; Saltzburgensi, Ruprechtus; Herbipolensi, Cilianus; Barm­bergensi, Henricus, &c. Roma tutelares habuit patronos Petrum & Paul. Mediolanum, Ambrosium; Colonia, Agrippina tres Magos vrsulam, & 11000. virgin. Augusta vindelicorum vtricum; Lutetia, Genefiuam; Argen­toratum, Otiliam; Brunswiga, Autorem, &c. A Nautis inuocabatur Nicolaus & Christopherus; à studiosis [...] & Catherina; à pictoribus, Lucas; à [...], Cosmas & Damianus; à Iurisconsultis, Iuo; à Theologis, Au­gustinus & Thomas, ab equitibus Georgius; à Fabris, Eulogius; à Sutoribus, Crispinus; à Sartoribus, Gutman­nus; à Figulis, Goarus; à Venatoribus, Eustachius; à [...], Afra & Magdalena, &c. Contrà Grandinem inuocabantur Iohannes & Paulus; contrà incendia ignis, Agatha & Florianus; contrà vitium corruptelam, Vr­banus; contrà Rubiginem, Iodocus; contrà Bruchos, Magnus; contrà Pestem, Sebastianus & Rochus; contrà Febrem, Petronella; contrà venenum, Iohannes Euangelista, & Benedictus Abbas; contrà dentium dolores, Apo­lonia; contrà occulorum vitia, Otilia; contrà [...] pudendorum, Appollinaris; contrà calculum, Liberius; contrà ignem sacrum, Antonius, &c. Contracti inuocabant Wolffgangum; calculo laborantes, Liborium, Doe­moniaci, E Romanum; Epileptici, Valentinum; Captini, Leonardum; Puerperae, Margaretam, &c. Anserum, cu­ra commendabatur, Gallo, Ouium, Wendelino; Equorum, Eulogio, Boum, Pelagio; Porcorum, Antonio; lg­nis, Floriano, &c. (to which purpose you alledge him;) and therefore the Iesuit ouer-reacheth lowd­ly, when he saith, This being a Doctrine taught by the learnedest Father which Christianitie bred, being by him grounded on Scripture.

IESVIT. A

Specially, seeing this was vsuall in the Church, in her most flourishing age. S. Lucie went on Pilgrimage vnto the body of S. Agatha for helpe of her mother, putting pe­culiar confidence in her intercession, as being a Christian Virgin of her Countrey and profession. S. Iustina, a virgin, being by the deuill tempted against virginall puritie, fled to B the most glorious of Virgins, Virginem Mariam rogauit, Greg. Naz. in S. Sipr. Paulinus Epist. ad Cytherium. vt periclitanti virgini opem feret, as S. Nazianzen writes. S. Martinian (as Paulinus records) hauing suf­fered shipwracke, called with peculiar deuotion and trust vpon Saint Paul, whose Epistles he did highly honour, re­membring that the same Saint yet liuing, deliuered three­score soules from the like perill, neither was his Petition frustrate.

ANSWER. C

Your Argument, to wit, Saint Lucie, Saint Iustina, Saint Martinian, sought deliuerance by Intercession of Saints, Ergo, This was Catholicke Doctrine in the more flourishing age of the Church, hath two lame ioynts.

First, The sequele is false, for neither was this age the most flourishing age Chrysoft. in 1. Cor. Hom. 36. Coe­lum Ecclesia tunc fuit, spiritu cuncta administrante, cun­cta Ecclesiae capita moderante, afflatu suo vnumquenque corripiente. Nunc vero vestigia tantum rerum illarum tenemus, &c. Videtur Ecclesia hodie, mulieri quae veteri foelicitate exciderit similis. Quaeque symbola tantum foelicitatis illius referat, quaedam arcus & scriuia rerum praetiosissimarum ad­huc seruans, thesauro destituto., but farre inferiour to ages precedent: neither doth the particular practise of certaine persons, make this de­uotion Catholicke; because to the being of Catholicke it is re­quired, D that the thing so denominate, be originally Apostoli­call, and vniuersally practised in former ages, as well as in the latter Vincent. Lir. c. Haer. cap. 39. Quicquid vel omnes vel plures, vno eodem (que) [...] manifeste, frequenter, perseueranter, &c..

Secondly, The Antecedent is not sufficiently prooued, for no antient Author is produced concerning Saint Lucie. And Iu­stina E the Virgin, according to the Narration of Gregorie Nazianzen, being in distresse (as Susanna sometimes was) [...], &c. despairing of all other remedies she slieth to God, & then assu­meth [Page 347] for her Patron and Protectour, Christ Iesus her spouse, A and after this, [...], &c. shee besought the Virgin Marie to succour her, being a distres­sed Virgin, First, she slieth to God. Secondly, shee maketh Christ her Patron. Thirdly, she requesteth the Virgin Marie, (in zeale, rather than vpon knowledge.) Fourthly, shee is deli­uered, not by Pilgrimage to Saints, but by prayer and fasting, to God. And although Gregorie Nazianzen (speaking onely by hearesay) reporteth that she supplicated (not by any Collect, or set forme of deuotion, but by a short eiaculation) to the Virgin Marie, yet this was done by her in the last place, and B after she had first sought to God and Christ; and her deliuerance is wholly ascribed by Nazianzen [...]. to Christ, and in no sort to the Virgin Marie.

Martinian being in danger of shipwracke, amased and af­frighted at the present perill, he tooke vp Saint Pauls Epistles, and laid them to his brest, and Paulinus saith Paul. in Carm ad Cither. to. 5. Biblioth. Col. pag. 225. Aiacentes pe­ctori tanget suo E­pistolas Apostoli. Hunc in pauore codicem, sed nesci­ens rebus relictis sumpserat., That God by his grace did giue this man to Saint Paul, whose Epistles and Doctrine hee esteemed so highly, as that neglecting all other goods and stuffe which were in the shippe, hee gathered vp onely Pauls Epistles. I finde in this Poeme C (for the Iesuit vsed other mens eyes when he cited Paulinus his Epistles to Cythereus) no pilgrimage or supplication made by Martinian to S. Paul, but a singular deuotion to S. Pauls E­pistles, and Gods protection and fauour towards him, for the loue he bare the Apostle and his Doctrine, vpon which, it plea­sed the Diuine Maiestie to bestow life and safetie vpon him, and to deliuer him from perill, as he did those for whom Saint Paul prayed, Acts 27.24. But note here, Saint Pauls Epistles saue a man from shirwracke, and yet in the Ocean of the Papacie, they D must be the cause of many a mans shipwracke vpon the rocke of Inquisition. I maruell if the Iesuite blushed not when hee wrote this, well knowing what euill entertainement they giue Gods Booke, that if it be but found in a ship, it is so farre from sauing a man (as it did Martinian in Paulinus) that it confiscateth the whole fraught to the Holy house.

IESVIT.

Notwithstanding we confesse, That heerein a discreet E mediocritie is to be obserued, and if any abuses bee crept in amongst common people, we desire they should be reformed; but so, that paring away the abuse, wee take not away the substance of a pious Christian Custome. For wee cannot [Page 348] expect that simple people in matter of Religion will not A sometimes foolishly, and superstitiously mistake, which when Aug. li. de Moribus Eccles. c. 10. it happens, we must (as S. Augustine saith) Ignoranti­am instruere pertinaciam deridere.

ANSVVER.

Shamefull and intollerable abuses are committed by Ro­mists in this kind, and some learned Papists themselues Cassand. Con­sult. [...] mer. & Inter­cess. Sanct. pa. 970. Alter error est quod homines eti­am non malicertos fibi Sanctos tanquam patronos, & tutores deligerunt, in eorum meritis atque intercessi­one, plus quam in Christi merito fidutiam posuerunt, atque adeo vnico illo aduocationis Christi officio ob­scurato, Sanctos [...] inprimis virginem matrem, in illius locum substituerunt. Concil. Colon. Expl. Decal. [...] fatemur pastorum dormitantium [...], error in Ecclesiam, quo vulgus verae pietatis non satis intelli­gens, singulorum morborum curam singulis Sanctis assignauit. haue desired reformation. But one may as soone make the Morions B skinne white, as cleanse this leprosie: and as in A dulterie, so in Idolatry, discreet moderation hath no place.

IESVIT. §. 7. C Concerning Oblations made vnto Saints.

ANother circumstance whereupon Protestants ground the seuenth cause of their dislike, is, our offering oblations vnto Saints; which your Maiestie doth obiect peculiarly as done to the blessed Virgin Mary. D

ANSWER.

IN the old law as Sacrifices were offered to God onely, Ex­od. 22.20. Iud. 13.16.2. Chron. 34.25. so likewise oblations and vowes, Deut. 23.21. Leuit. 24.5.6. and as the Lord con­demned people of Idolatrie, for sacrificing to creatures, so the Israelites are reprooued for burning incense to the brasen Ser­pent. 2. Kings 18.4. and to the queene of heauen. Ierem. 44.25. This law in respect of the substance, is morall: and consequent­ly E obligeth Christian people, as well in case of Oblations, as of Sacrifices. Now by what authoritie and right the Roman Church can abrogate this law in whole or in part, and appropri­ating Sacrifices to God, make prayer, vowes, Incense and obla­tions, [Page 349] common to God and Saints, our aduersaries haue not as A yet made remonstrance, and the Iesuit in this place alleadgeth no diuine authoritie, to giue his Maiestie satisfaction, but pro­duceth onely an historicall narration out of S. Augustine, and [...], who report certaine miracles wrought by God Almigh­tie at the Sepulchres of Martyrs.

IESVIT.

I answer, if any Catholike should offer to the blessed mo­ther of God by way of sacrifice, any the least thing, he were seuerely to be rebuked and better instructed: for sacrifice is B a religious homage due to God onely, in which respect the Nulli Martyrū sed ipsi deo Martyrum quamuis in me­morias Martyrum constituimus alta­ria. Aug. c. Faust. li. 20. c. 21. sacrifice of the holy Eucharist is neuer offered vnto any but vnto God, in memorie and honour of Saints: herein the Collyridians women Priests did erre, who did sacrifice a wafer cake vnto the blessed Virgin: which kind of worship vnder the title of adoration, S. Epiphanius reprooues, Epiph. haer. 78. allowing the Catholike worship, as thereby tearming her honourable, not for humane or ciuill, but for diuine and su­pernaturall C respects.

True it is, that in Catholike countryes people offer vnto Saints, lights, flowers, and cheynes, not as sacrifices, but as ornaments, to set foorth their tombes and shrines, wherein they doe not dissent from antiquitie, nor from Gods holy will, who hath confirmed such deuotions by miracle, as di­uers Authours worthy of all credit relate, particularly S. Augustine, by Protestants allowed as the most faithfull D witnesse of antiquitie. He tells that a woman starke blind, Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei. li. 22. c. 8. recouered her sight by laying to her eyes flowers, which had touched the shrine wherein were carried about the Relikes of the most glorious Martyr S. Stephan. A more wonder­full Aug. ibid. example in the same kind he relateth done vpon an old man of good note, who being sicke and readie to die, did yet very obstinately refuse to beleeue in Christ, and leaue his Idolatrie, although he was very earnestly mooued there­unto E by his children that were zealous Christians. His son in law despairing to preuaile by persuasion, resolued to goe and pray at the tombe of S. Stephan, and hauing performed his deuotions, with burning affection, with many groanes and [...], being to depart, tooke with him some flowers [Page 350] that were on the shrine, and laid them secretly vnder his A father in law his head, the night as he went to sleepe. Be­hold, the next morning the old man awaking outof his sleepe, cryeth out, desiring them to come to call the Bishop to baptise him; He had his desire, he was baptised: afterwards as long as he liued, he had this prayer in his mouth, Lord Iesu receiue my spirit; being altogether ignorant that that prayer was the last speech of S. Stephan, when he was sto­ned to death by the Iewes, which also were the last words B of this happy old man, for not long after, pronouncing these words, be gaue vp his soule.

Other oblations also Catholikes vse to offer vnto Saints, not as sacrifices, but as memories and monuments of bene­fits receiued, as pictures of limmes, by Saints prayers mira­culously cured, that therein they doe not deflect from anti­ent Christian deuotion; and that the Christian Church in her best times, vsed vniuersally to make such oblations, C Theodoret is a sufficient witnesse, who writing against the Gentiles, alleadgeth as a manifest signe of Christs God­head Theodor. d. Cur. Graecorum Affect. lib. 8. and omnipotencie, that Idols being excluded, he brought in Martyrs to be honoured in their roome, not superstiti­ously as Gods, but Religiously as diuine men, inuocating and beseeching them to be Intercessours for them vnto God. And those that piously and faithfully pray, obtaine what they desire, as testifie the oblations which they (being there­vnto D bound by their vowes) present in the Chappels of the Saints, as tokens of health recouered; for some hang vp images of eyes, others of eares, others of hands, some made of gold, some of siluer. Thus he. So generall and so notorious euen vnto Infidells, was this Christian deuotion.

ANSWER.

Touching the Collyridians, I answer, that notwithstanding there is some difference in the materiall act, betweene Romists and them, yet because Epiphanius condemneth not onely exter­nall E sacrifice, but all Oblation to the blessed virgin, and allow­eth onely, that honour, and not adoration Epiphan. Haer. 59. Siue 79. Hono­retur sane Maria, pater vero filius, & [...] Sanctus a­dorentur. Mariam adorare nemo ve­lit, &c. Quamuis Maria vel optima fuerit ac Sancta, & honore dignissima; non idcirco tamen adoratio ne prosequenda., shal be yeelded vnto her; therefore Prayers, incense-offerings, and presents to Saints deceased, were held vnlawfull in this Fathers dayes.

[Page 351] Secondly, Saint Augustine de Ciuit. Dei, l. 22. c. 8. doth not A mention any Prayers, Oblations, Vowes, or donatiues offered a Aug. Ib. visum est genero eius, vt [...] ad memoriam Sancti Stephani, & illic pro ea quan­tum posset oraret, vt Deus illi daret mentem bonam, &c. to Saints and Martyrs; but he reporteth what miraculous cures were performed at the toombes of some Martyrs: now, be­cause these things were extraordinarie, and the credit of di­uers of them dependeth vpon fame (which is many times vn­certaine Tertul. Apol. c. 7. Cur malum fama? Quia velox an quia plurimum B mendax? quae ne tunc quidem cum veri aliquid adfert, sine mendatij vitio est, detrahens, [...], de mutans, de veritate., and S t. Augustine himselfe saith, They are not com­mended vnto vs by such waightie authoritie, as that without all doubt, they must needs be credited Aug. d. Ciu. Dei. lib. 22. cap. 8. Non tanta ea commendat [...] vt sine difficultate vel dubitatione credantur.) they cannot be sufficient grounds or foundations of Catholicke Doctrine or Practise.

Thirdly, Theoderit. d. cur. Graec. Affect. lib. 8. saith, Wee (Oh Atqui nos, O Grae­ci homines nec ho­stias Martiribꝰ nec libamina vlla de­ferimꝰ sed vt San­ctos homines dei (que) amicissimos hono­ramus. Grecians) neither offer sacrifice to Martirs, nor drinke offerings, but honour them as holy men, and as the friends of God. And whereas he further saith, That some hang vp the shapes of eyes, others of eares, &c. he meaneth that these were monuments of mira­culous cures, wrought in those dayes extraordinarily by God at the Sepulchres of Martyrs: but he affirmeth not, that they Gratissime accipit eorum Dominus, qualiacunque sunt dona, &c. C were oblations, offered to Martyrs. And yet the particular pra­ctise of some people in those dayes, whatsoeuer it was, if it haue not ground in Diuine Reuelation, cannot raise an Article of Faith or necessarie dutie.

IESVIT. § 8. The Romane Church set formes of Prayer, without cause misliked. D

FInally, Protestants dislike the circumstance of praying in a set forme vnto Saints, and that we appoint a par­ticular office to the blessed Virgin Mary, which cannot be proued to haue been vsed in the Primatiue Church.

ANSVVER. E

THe Romish set formes of Prayers to the Virgin Marie and other Saints deceased, are iustly condemned by vs, not meerely because they are exercised in a set forme (which is accidentall) but in respect of the matter and substance of them, neither can our Aduersaries demonstrate, that such Pray­ers, [Page 352] either in a set forme, or by sudden inspiration, were vsed in A the Primatiue Church; for the holy Apostles, which are the prime Fathers and founders of that Church, prescribed and practised no other forme of Prayer, than such as was consonant to their Scriptures: and the Churches which succeeded them, for certaine ages, continued in their Doctrine, and exercised the deuotion of Prayer, according to the forme appointed by them. And concerning latter times, our exception is the same, with our Sauiours, in another case, Math. 19.8. From the beginning it was not so: and we say with Saint Cyprian Cypr. Epist. 74. Si ad diuinae Tra­ditionis caput & o­riginem reuerta­mur cessat error humanus, &c. Si canalis aquam du­cens qui copiose prius & largiter profluebat subito deficiat nonne ad fontem pergitur vt illic defectionis ra­tio noscatur, &c. Quod & nunc facere oportet Dei Sacerdotes praecepta diuina seruantes, vt si in aliquo nutauerit & vaccillauerit veritas ad originem dominicam & Euangelicam & Apostolicam Traditionem [...] & inde surgat actus no­stri ratio vnde & ordo & origo surrexit., to all latter examples: If veritie be changed, or leane a toside, wee must B looke backe, and returne to Diuine, Euangelicall, and Apostolike Tra­dition; and deriue the order of our Action, from the originall ground where it first began. And Tertullian saith Tertul. d. virg. vel. c. 1. Hoc exigere veritatem cui nemo prescribere C potest, non spatium temporum, non patrocinia personarum, non priuilegium Regionum: Ex his enim fere con­suetudo initium ab aliqua ignorantia vel simplicitate fortita in vsum per successionem corroboratur & ita aduer. sus veritatem vindicatur. Sed Dominus noster Christus veritatem se, non consuetudinem [...]. Si semper Christus & prior omnibus aeque veritas sempiterna & antiqua res., If a custome, proceeding from ignorance or simplicitie, be confirmed by vse of succession, and opposed against veritie, we must obserue, that neither space of time, nor priuiledge of persons, may prescribe against truth; for Christ is eter­nall, and before all, and in like sort, veritie is most antient.

IESVIT.

I answer, That the Primmar or Office (so tearmed) of our Ladie, is not an Office properly and principally directed vnto her, but an Office containing praises of God, taken out of holy Scripture, wherein commemoration of her is made, D so as I dare say, That the Prayers of the Office of our Ladie that are directed towards her, make not the hundred part thereof. And seeing it is most certaine, that the Christian Church in her best times, did frequently pray vnto Saints; what reason haue wee to thinke, that in her set forme of Prayers she did not vse to craue the intercessions of Saints? If it be lawfull, pious, and profitable, when we pray vnto God, to pray also to Saints, by their Mediation offering E our Prayer to him, why should any dislike the doing of this in a set forme, that is allowed by the Church? why should this displease rather than an extemporall forme?

[Page 353] But further wee can prooue, That the Church in her A best times, did pray vnto Saints in set formes, as Catho­lickes now doe, euen with a kinde of Lettanies, a forme of Prayer acknowledged and confessed by the Magdebur­gians, Mag. cent. 4. cap. 4 to haue beene in vse euen in the fourth age after Christ. Jn which age the foure first generall Councells were held.

ANSWER. B

You denie, that the Primar, or Office of our Ladie, is an of­fice, properly and principally directed to her, &c. But the rea­son whereupon you ground this denyall, is slight; for although there is a mixture of Prayers and Praises to God, contained in this Office, yet the Virgin Marie is as directly and properly in­uocated therein, as God himselfe, or Iesus Christ: besides, you haue many Psalters and Primers of our Ladie, and in some of them, the Virgin Marie is the most speciall Obiect and matter of the seruice. C

The Romane Breuiarie saith In Octau. As­sumpt. Lect. Ecce quibus., In this day of solemnitie and gladnesse, wee call vpon the sweet name of Marie. And to the A­postles Breu. Rom. Hym­no exultet Iaud., O yee, to whose command the health and infirmitie of all is subiect, heale all those that bee sicke in manners, restoring vs to ver­tues. To Thomas Didimus Portif. Sar. in Tho. Did., O Thomas Didimus, by Christ, whom thou deseruedst to touch, we beseech thee, with our loud sounding Prayers, to succour vs wretches, that wee be not damned with the wicked, in the comming of the Great Iudge. To the blessed Vir­gin Lect. s. [...]. in seruit. B. Virg. Mar., Wash away our offences, that we being redeemed by thee, may be able to obtaine the seate of euerlasting glorie. Also Rom. Breu. 3. Die infra octau. Assumpt. Virg. Mar. Lect. 4. Iubilemus in arca Dom., All haile D holy Virgin, the medecine of all our sorrowes, by whom death was ex­pelled, and life brought in. The Romane Breuiarie teacheth vs to pray Breu. Rom. in Abdon & Senon. Iulij 30., That the merits of the Saints, Abdon and Senon interce­ding, we may deserue to be deliuered from all our necessities. And Rom. Miss. in Leone. for Leo his merits interceding, absolue vs from all sinnes. Also, By the sword of sorrow Aur. Litan. which went thorow the Virgins heart, and the compassion of teares which she shed vnder the Crosse, haue mercie on vs. Also Miss. sar. in me­mor. Prim. & Fae­lic. in. fest. Iunij., Let the Host to be consecrate, bee pleasing vnto thee, by the celebritie of the Martirs, Primus and Faelicianus, that by E their glorious merits and Prayers, it may purge our sinnes, and recon­cile to thee the Prayers of thy seruants.

The like superlatiue boldnesse was, in the enditing and pub­lishing Bonauentures Psalter, wherein God and Christ are sacri­legiously robbed, yea, blasphemously dishonoured, to embe­lish [Page 354] the Virgin Marie; yet all this the Church of Rome dige­steth, A permitteth, authoriseth, &c.

In that Psalter, these and the like formes of Prayer are ex­tant Posseu. Appa­rat. verb. Bonauen­tura. Bulla. Sixti. 4. to. 2. Opusc. Bonau. Psalt. Bonauent. Miserere mei Domina, quae mater misericordiae num­cuparis, & secundum viscera misericordiarum tuarum, munda me ab omnibus iniquitatibus meis. Essunde grati­am tuam super me, & solitam clementiam tuam ne subtrahas à me, quoniàm peccata mea confitebor tibi, & co­ram te me accuso de sceleribus meis, fructui ventris tui me reconcilia, & pacifica me ei qui me creauit. Domina in nomine tuo saluum me fac, & ab iniustitijs meis libera me, &c. Miserere mei Domina, miserere mei, quià para­tum est cor meum, exquirere voluntatem tuam, &c. Eripe me de inimicis meis Domina mundi, exurge in oc­cursum meum, Regina pietatis, &c. Deus misereatur nostri, & benedicat nobis per illam quae eum genuit, &c. Do­mina in adiutorium meum intende, & luce misericordiae tuae illustra mentem meam, &c. In te Domina speraui, B non confundar in aeternum, in tua misericordia libera me, & eripe me, &c. Quam bonus Israel Deus his qui colunt matrem suam, & venerantur: ipsa est nempè solatium nostrum, in laboribus subuentio optima, obtexit caligine animam meam hostis, in visceribus meis Domina lumen fac, omnis auertatur à me ira Dei per te, placa eum meritis & praecibus tuis. In iuditio pro me asiste coram eo, suscipe causam meam, & mea sis aduocata. Domina venerunt gentes in haereditaté Dei, quas tu meritis tuis Christo confederasti, &c. Benedicta sis Domina, & mater Dei mei Israel, qui per te visitauit, & fecit redemptioné plebis suae, & erexit cornu Salutaris castitatis tuae, in domo Dauid pueri sui. Sicut locutus est per os Isaiae, & aliorum sanctorum Prophetarūeius, [...] ex inimicis praesta, Vir­ginum virgo, & de manu omnium qui nos oderunt pacem nobis tribue. Et fac misericordiam pro parentibus & nobis, vt memor sis testamenti omnipotents Dei, quod iurauit ad patres nostros Abraham, & semini eius in saecu­la. Sic sine timore de manu inimicorum nostrorum liberati, quiete seruiemus, illi in sanctitate & iustitia coram te, omnibus diebus nostris. Et tu Maria Propheta Dei vocaberis, quoniàm nouisti quod respexit humilitatem an­cillae suae, per quam dedit scientiam salutis plebis eius, in remissionem peccatorum, per viscera misericordiae mul­titudinis tuae. Visita nos stella matutina oriens ex alto. Illumina tenebras sedentium in vmbra mortis, & eas luco dilectissimi filij tui digneris illustrare. Miserere misericordie mater nobis miseris peccatoribus, qui retro acta pec­cata C poenitere negligimus, ac multa quotidiè poenitenda committimus. Quicunquè vult saluus esse, antè omnia opus est vt teneat de Mària firmam fidem, quam nisi quisquè integram inuiolatamquè seruauerit, absque du­bio in [...] peribit. Quam demùm ipse in Coelum assump [...], & seder ad dextram filij, non cessans pro nobis filium exorare. Haec est Fides de Maria Virgine, quam [...] quisquè fidelitèr, firmiterquè crediderit saluus esse non poterit..

Oh blessed Lady, my Sauiour, I will put my confidence in thee, and I shall not need to feare. Oh blessed Ladie, our Saluation is placed in thy hands, who thou pleasest shall be saued, and they shall perish eter­nally, from whom thou turnest away thy face. Blessed art thou my La­dy, the mother of the God of Israell, who by thee hath visited, and sent redemption vnto his people, and hath raised vp the horne of Saluation, D euen thy chastitie, in the house of Dauid thy seruant, &c. Thou ô Ma­rie shalt be called the Prophet of God, by thee hath he giuen the know­ledge of Saluation for the remission of sinnes, by the bowels of the mul­titude of thy mercies, Visit vs ô thou day starre arising from an high, Thou art the gate of Paradise, the ladder of Heauen, the Arke of Pietie and Grace, the spring of Mercie, the Mediatrix of God and men. And in the same Psalter these words are found, Whosouer will be sa­ued, aboue all things, he must haue stedfast Faith of the Virgin Marie, and the right Faith is (among other Articles) God assumed her (bo­dily) E into Heauen, where she sits on the right hand of Christ, &c.

Secondly, the Iesuit prooueth, that set formes of prayers to Saints are lawfull by this Argument: If it be lawfull to make intercessions to Saints, then it is lawfull to performe this in a set forme; But the first is true, for the Primitiue Church did [Page 355] this, and the Magdeburgians confesse, That a kind of Letanie A to Saints was vsed in Primitiue times, Ergo, &c. I answer, That if by Primitiue Church, be vnderstood the Church Primi­tiue, comprehending the Apostles, and their immediate suc­cessours, then the proofe of the assumption is false; for that Primitiue Church vsed no such deuotion. And if by Primitiue Church, be vnderstood (extensiue & exclusiue) the Church af­ter the three hundred yeares, inuocation of Saints was not vsed by the whole Church for three hundred yeares more: nei­ther can the practise of any Church (excluding the Apostles) produce doctrine of Faith, or of necessarie duetie. B

The Magdeburgians rehearse out of a counterfeit worke, fa­thered vpon Athanasius Baron. Anno Christi 49. n. 19. Bellar. d. Scriptor. Eccles. in Athana­sio. Magdeb. Cen­tur. 4. cap. 4. pa. 396. & 397., a set prayer vsed to the Virgin Ma­rie; but they adde, apparet multa esse deprauata & supposita in isto­rum doctorum scriptis, It is apparant that many things depraued and supposititious are found among the writings of these Doctors.

IESVIT.

But they will perchance say, that they do not so much C dislike set formes of prayer vnto Saints, as some phrases and speeches in our praying bookes, that seeme to giue too much vnto creatures; as our calling the blessed Virgin, Mo­ther of Grace, Mother of Mercie, saying to her, Ladie protect vs from the Diuell, receiue vs in the houre of death, giue light to the blind, pardon the guiltie, re­mooue from vs all euill, &c. A answer, These speeches cannot iustly bee disliked, because they are vnderstood in a D pious sence, knowne to a Catholicke, a sence obuious and plaine, according to the phrase of Scripture, and which the words may well beare, euen according to the common cu­stome of speech. The nature of things being various, and the answerable conceits of men copious, but words to ex­presse such conceits scant, and in great paucitie, Necessitie doth inforce to vse words applicable to diuers senses: For example, one man may deliuer another from death, either E by authoritie, pardoning him as do Kings; or by iustice de­fending him, as do Aduocates; by force taking him out of his enemies hands, as do Souldiors; or paying his ransome to them that keepe him captiue, as Almoners; finally, by [Page 356] begging his life of them that haue power to take it away, A as Intercessors. These be verie different wayes of reliefe, yet haue we but one word to expresse them all, to wit, to saue a mans life; which therefore is to be vnderstood, ac­cording to the subiect it is applied: and if men want vn­derstanding, or will, to take our wordes, according to the matter they are applied vnto, there can neuer want cauills, vnlesse we either speake not at all, or when we speake, euer vse long circumlocutions, which were ridiculous, and in B verse impossible, the meeter not permitting it. And yet the aforesaid misliked phrases in the office of the blessed vir­gin, are taken out of the hymnes and verses thereof. If they that by begging obtaine of the King the life of one condemned to death, may be, and are commonly said to saue his life, though they saued him by intercession, not by their proper authoritie, Why may not Saints bee said to giue vs the things which by their prayers they obtaine for C vs? Why may not the Church speake in hymnes and in verse, as the learnedest Fathers speake euen in prose, neuer ima­gining that any would mistake their meaning.

ANSVVER.

We condemne the verie substance of your prayers, in this kind, and not only some phrases, &c. For what Prophet, or what Apostle, or Euangelist, did euer teach Gods people to pray in this manner? D

And whereas some formes of your prayers to Saints, being vnderstood according to the sound of words, are blasphe­mous Read sundrie formes of such pray­ers in Chemn. Ex­am. Concil. Trid. p. 3. pa. 145. Herbrād. c. Greg. Val. d. mul­tipl. Papat. Idolom. Gerhard. loc. com. to. 8. d. Inuoc. Sanct., you labour to qualifie this by a fauourable expositi­on, pretending that you say one thing, and meane another, and that herein you varie not from the Scripture. You call the bles­sed Virgin, Mother of Grace, Mother of Mercie, Queene of Hea­uen, &c. you say, that all power is giuen her in heauen and in earth Bernerdin. d. Senis. apud Ben­zon. in magnif. li. 1. cap. 18. Data est tibi ô Domina, omnis potestas in [...] & in terra, vt quicquid volueris, valeas efficere., and because she outliued her sonne, she was by naturall right heire of all the world Benzon. in Cant. Magnif. lib. 1. cap. 18. Sed iure haereditario mundi Monarchiam acquisiuisse, tempore mor­tis Christi filij eius iam demonstrandum est, &c. Nullus alius in terris fuit, qui de iure in [...] haereditate succederet Christo. Ius naturale postulat, dictanteratione, vt mater, sicut [...] in filium habet, ità quoquè habeat in [...] quae sunt filij.. Yea some of you go further, teaching that as Christ redeemed man-kind by his flesh and bloud, so she redeemed the E [Page 357] same with her soule Coron. Mar. 7. Stel. 2. Coronae. lu­stus quiliber trade­re cor suum ad vi­gilandum [...] ad Dominam mun­di, per quam redemptus est & reconciliatus. Stellar. Coron. B. Mar. lib. 12. pa. 1. ar. 2. Christus carnem pro nobis & sanguinem, Maria imolabat animam., and that all grace and glorie comming from A Christ the head, passeth to the Church, by the Virgin Marie, as by the necke Benzon. in Cant. Magnif. lib. 1. ca. 18. Christus cum sit caput, per collum, id est, Mariam effundit in fideles benignitatem suam, Maria vero recipiens à Christo gratias, nobis libe­rahtèr, & benignè communicat., and she as his mother, hath all right, authoritie, and dispensa­tion of his mercie Ib. Ipsa tanquam eius mater, ius, authoritatem, & dispensationem illius [...], constituit enim illam Dominus Dominam domus suae, & principem omnis possessionis suae. Bernerdin. d. Bust. Mar. p. 1. Serm. 5. d. concep. Mar. B. Virgo est Domina, & Imperatrix totius or bis, & omnium creaturarum. Primo namquè est Regina Coeli & Angelorum, &c. Dominatur quoquè inferno, dominatur etiam mundo, & hominibus habitantibus in eo. Jbid. p. 3. d. Nom. Mar. 4. Excell. Si ergo imperat filio, ratione maternalis iurisdicti­onis, B qui fuit [...] illi vt habetur, Luc. 2. Multo magis imperat omnibus creaturis filio subiectis..

This lying doctrine is coloured with certaine distinctions, and forced instances of holy Scripture, which notwithstanding agree to the present question like Harpe and Harrow.

Men indeed which are instruments of preseruing life, and sa­uing others, may be said in largenesse of speech, to giue life, or to be sauiours, Iud. 3. v. 9. & 15. But the blessed Virgin, and Saints deceased, since their departure, are not by any new acti­ons, instruments of spirituall life, nor bestowers of grace and saluation vpon the liuing. And when the Prophets and Apo­stles C exercised their office and ministerie vpon earth, Who euer stiled them Sauiours, or prayed vnto them with such a con­ceit, or by vsing such titles? They themselues gaue all glorie to God, and Christ; and instructed the Church to do the like. The Virgin Marie was neuer stiled a Redeemer, Mediatour, or Sauiour, by the holy Ghost, but she saith in her thankesgiuing, My spirit reioiceth in God my Sauiour. Some names are common, and sometimes that which was common or typically giuen to certaine persons in the old Testament, is appropriated in the new, as we obserue in the names of Sauiour, Iesus, Redeemer, D Mediatour, High Priest, and the like. Sometimes the effect of the principall cause is attributed to the instrumentall: but in all these, Regulam habemus praeter quam loqui fas non est, We haue a rule beside which we may not speake. And we are not so straighted for words, that we must of necessitie applie or com­municate the titles of Christ vnto the creatures.

Now to that which you adde by way of excuse, for your improper or abusiue speaking, (saying, in verse impossible, the mee­ter not permitting.) I answer, What an impudent and ridiculous plaster is this? will not verse permit vs to implore benefits, on­ly E at Gods hand by Christ? or will not the measure and num­ber of poeticall feet, without pinching in the stockes, be appli­ed to direct and euident compellation of Saints to pray for vs, without crauing the benefits we desire, at their own hands? [Page 358] Nay, who so readeth the Papisticall poeticall Church hymnes, A shall in the most of them find versing laws most broken, where the lawes of inuocation are most transgressed. A reasonable Poet in lesse than a weekes worke, would make so many hymns in exact verse, and yet without ridiculous circumlocutions ex­pres that, which might better beseeme the triumphant Church to heare from the militant. But that is verified in you, which Arnobius said of the Gentiles L. 6. c. Gent. pa. 193., Quod semel sinè ratione fecistis, nè videamini aliquando nescisse, defenditis, meliusquè putatis non vin­ci, quam confessae cedere atquè annuere veritati, That which you haue once done vnreasonably, you wil still persist in defending, B least you should seeme to haue beene ignorant; and you ra­ther desire to haue it appeare you are not ouercome, than to submit your selues to euident truth.

IESVIT.

Saint Gregorie Nazianzen (for his excellent lear­ning, Nazian. Or. 18. d. laudib. Cypr. tearmed by the Grecians, The Diuine) thus prayeth vnto Saint Cyprian: Looke downe on vs from heauen C with a propitious eye, guide our words and wayes, feed this holy flocke, gouerne it with vs, dispose some of them as farre as is possible, to better state, cast out importune and troublesome wolues, that cauill, aud catch at sylla­bles, vouchsafe vs the perfect and cleare splendor of the blessed Trinitie, with whom thou art alreadie present.

ANSWER. D

That Gregorie Nazianzen prayed vnto Saint Cyprian, is more than you can prooue; he vseth indeed an Oratoriall Apostro­phe, but your selues make a difference betweene a Prosopo­peia or Apostrophe, and Prayer: you say, you make an Apo­strophe to the Crosse, when you vse this Hymne, All haile oh Crosse, &c. And I thinke, you will not grant that the wodden Crosse heareth you: So by your owne Glosse, [...]. d. I­mag. ca. 24. Suar. in 3. Tho. tom. 1. Disp. 54. Sect. 4. Si interdum oratio vi­detur fundi ad imaginem, vt [...] dicit O crux, aue spes vnica, ange pijs iustitiam, &c. per Tropum & Prosopo­peiam explicanda est. Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. lib. 6. annot. 151. [...] monuimus non esse [...] verba semper [...] accipienda quo primum ad aures auditorum perueniunt, multa enim [...] per hyperbolem [...] enunciant & inculcant, vel occasione locorum temporum ac personarum adducti velaffectu­um impetu & orationis cursu rapti., Nazianzen, might by an Apostrophe speake to Cyprian, not thinking, or at least, not being assured that he heard him. E

[Page 359] Sixtus Senensis deliuereth this obseruation concerning the A Fathers, That in their Sermons wee may not take their words strictly, and in rigour, because they many times breake out into declamations, and enunciate and inculcate matters, by Hyper­boles, and other figuratiue speeches. We finde in Lipoman, one speaking to the girdle of the blessed Virgin in this manner: O veneranda zona, fac nos haeredes aeternae & Beatae vitae, & hanc no­stram vitam ab interitu conserua. Tuam haereditatem, tuum populum, O intemerata zona intemeratum conserua, ô venerable girdle, make vs heires of eternall and blessed life, and preserue this our present life, from perdition; ô vndefiled girdle preserue thy B people from pollution. If our Aduersaries will haue this speech to be figuratiue, they haue more reason to grant the same tou­ching Nazianzene, of whom it is certaine, that hee doubted Greg. Naz. o­rat. [...]. in Laud. Gorgon. Si hoc praemij sanctis animis diuinitus contingit, vt ista sentiant, nostram quoque orationem, &c. Idem. orat. 1. c. Iuli­an. Audi haec etiam Constantij [...], si quis [...] sensus est, &c. Ib. [...] provehor, vt tecum [...] cum presente atque audiente expostulem, &c. whether the B. Saints heare all our prayers or not.

IESVIT. C

And not onely Fathers, but also Scriptures speake of Saints in the same sort, our Sauiour saying, Make to your selues friends of the riches of iniquitie, that when you dye, [...]. 16.9. they may receiue you into the eternall Tabernacles. If then the Saints of God, by the mouth of veritie it selfe, be said to receiue their friends when they die, into the eternall Taber­nacles, because God mooued by their prayers, admits them into the blissefull vision of his essence, Why may not the D Church and her children craue the blessed Virgins interces­sion, in these words, Mother of mercy, receiue vs in the houre of death? And seeing God is tearmed in Scripture, Psal. 58. 18. Mercy, Why should not she be stiled Mother of Mercy, that is vndoubtedly Mother of God, especially seeing, that in, and of her, the Author of mercy and grace was conceiued and borne, and she filled with grace and charitie aboue all other Creatures? E

ANSWER.

Our Sauiour speaketh not of blessed Saints, but of indigent people, to whom men distribute their almes, and these are said [Page 360] to receiue their benefactours into heauen, because they are the A obiect of charitie, and beneficence, for which Christ receiueth mercifull persons into heauen Iansen. Harm. Euang. ca. [...]. Di­cuntur autem illi recepturi Benefa­ctores in coelum, simpliciterquidem quia propter illos Christus [...] benefactores re­cepturus est, quia sibi imputat factū, quod illis impen­ditur. Qualescūque [...] & quanquam non ipsimet ingredian­tur aeternas man­siones, dicuntur re­ctè benefactores suos recipere in coelum, ob ratio­nem prius dictam, quia propter be­neficia eis impen­sa, Christus illos recipit in coelum.. Math. 25.35. But was any mans vnderstanding so poore and beggerly, as therefore at any time to inuocate beggers? Hugo. Card. in Luc. 16.9. Recipiant vos pauperes, id est, sint causa vel oc­casio, quare recipi­amini. and in giuing almes to vse this forme of prayer, Oh blessed Mendicants receiue our almes, and receiue vs your benefactours into heauen Dyonis. Carthus. sup. Luc. 16. Reci­piant vos praefati amici, scilicet Deus & angli ac pauperes sancti.. Also some expositours re­ferre the former saying, to God and the Angels, which receiue charitable persons when they decease into the state of blessed­nes. Neither do Romists when they stile the blessed Virgin, Mo­ther of mercy, and pray vnto her to receiue them at the houre of B death, vnderstand these words [...], but properly, for they hold that she is a Mother of mercy Benzon. com. & disp in Magnis. li. 1. c. 18. Ipsa tanquam eius mater, ius, authoritatem, & [...] illius obtinet: constituit enim illam Dominus, Dominam, do­mus suae, & principem omnis possessionis suae. Bernardin. Marial. d Nominat. Mar. Ser. 5. Praerog. 1. B. Virgo pro­prie misericordiae est Regina., not onely by way of Intercession, but of distribution and dispensation: and she receiueth soules into heauen by her office and authoritie. This is affirmed by Rutilius Benzonius, a moderne Roman in his Commentarie vpon the Magnificat. And Stellarium, Coronae Mariae saith Stel. Cor. B. Virg Mar. li. 12. ar. 3. Beata virgo emit nos, & possedit, dando pretio­sissimum Thesaurum pro nobis scilicet corpus sanguinem & animas filij sui., She hath this right, because she hath bought vs with a Price. And Viegas the Iesuit citeth Arnoldus Carnotensis Arnold. Carno. to. 6. Biblioth. D Vieg. in Apoc. 12. Com. 2. Sect. 2. Constituta est super omnem creaturam, & quicunque Iesu curuat genu, matri quoque pronus supplicat: & filij gloriam, cum matre, non tam communem iudico, quam eandem. [...] Deo remanente, cessit quodammodo misericordiam Dei matri, Sponsaeque regnanti. Itaque virginemdiuisum ha­bere cum Deo imperium., saying, She is placed ouer all creatures, and her glory is not onely common, but the very same with her sonnes. And Viegas applyeth the words of Ecclesiasticus to her, C In me is the grace of all life and veritie, in me is all hope of life and ver­tue. Paulus Cararia Carar. Sum. Canon. & Moral. Reg. 1. n. 3. punct. 5. n. 32. Quae haec quaeso preparatio? certe nulla alia, nisi quod transeant per manus illius, nam qui [...] nobis dedit per virginem, nostra vult il­la mediatrice acciperc. Brigit. Reu. li. 1. ca. 50. Sicut calor procedit a sole, sic per [...] omnis misericordia dabitur. Tu enim es quasi fons largissimus, de quo misericordia de miseris fluit. Biel. in Can. [...]. lect. 32. Nihil nos Deus ha­bere voluit, quod per manus Mariae non transiret. Osor. Conc. to. [...]. in visit Mariae. Maria ex quo Dei mater ef­fecta est, vniuersi curam suscepit, tanquam omnium mater, tanquam membra [...] filij sui homines curat, tan­quam haereditatem filij & illius domum. Foelix profecto hominum sors, quibus Christus pater, & Maria mater est, tanquam Aquila super pullos suos, tanquam pastor super gregem suam. Gregem patris pascebat Rachel, & eius causa Iacob amouit lapidem, quo puteus claudebatur, & adaquauit gregem. Gregem Dei Maria pascit ac propter ipsam Christus Dominus, gratiae aquam fidelibus tribuit. Idem. to. 4. d. Sing. Deuo. B. Virg. Sicut hanc ha­bet in [...] eminentiam coeleste corpus, qood omnis generatio, [...], & motus inferiorum ab co E pendet: sic decreuit Deus omnia spiritualia dona hominibus concedere per Mariam, quae summa dignitas creaturae est. Omnis Gratia quae est in Christo, est in Maria, in Christo tanquam in capite influente, in Maria tanquam in collo transfundente: in Christo tanquam in fonte, in Maria tanquam in Canali. saith, Whatsoeuer Christ giueth, must passe vnto vs by the hands of Mary, as by a Mediatrix. Osorius the Iesuit saith, Euen as the heauens haue that eminencie, that all generation, per­fection, and motion of things inferiour depends vpon them; so likewise God bestoweth all spirituall gifts to men, by Mary.

IESVIT. A

That other phrase, much disliked by your Maiestie, That God reseruing Justice to himselfe, hath giuen away his Opera Regia, Resp. ad Card. Peron. Mercie to his Mother; is not vsed by the Church in any of her Prayers, nor allowed of by Catholike Diuines: nor will wee iustifie it, being an harsh and vnfitting Metaphor, though thereby the Authors thereof meant to expresse a Truth, to wit, that the blessed Virgin is exceeding gracious with her Sonne, and her intercession verie potent, alluding B to a phrase of Scripture ( Hester, cap. 5. 3, 6. cap. 7. 2. Mar. 6. 23.) whereby such as are gracious with a Prince, are said, that they may haue any thing of him, though halfe of his Kingdome: So diuiding Gods Kingdome into Iustice and Mercie, to shew how gracious the blessed Virgin is with her Sonne, they say, God hath giuen her one halfe of his Kingdome, to wit, his Mercie: which is a Metaphor farre-fetcht, not to be vsed, howsoeuer in Charitie it may C be excused.

ANSVVER.

It is not a Phrase onely, but a blasphemous Doctrine, which his Maiestie misliked: For what can be more impious, than to maintaine, That Christ reseruing the Kingdome of Iustice to himselfe, hath graunted the Kingdome of Mercie to his Mother?

To veyle this Sacriledge, the Iesuit affirmeth two things: First, That this forme of speaking is not vsed by the Romane D Church, nor approoued by Catholike Diuines: secondly, That being expounded charitably, it containeth a Truth.

But these excuses are Figge-leaues, and painted Sepulchers: for learned Papists, both of elder and moderne times, maintaine the same, to wit, Thomas Thom. Praefat. in Epist. Canon. Gorrhan. ibid. Gerson. Magnificata est ita hodiè B. Virgo, vt Regina Coeli, imo & mundi jure vocetur, habens praeeminentiam, & virtutem influxiuam, super omnes, principatum habet dimidij Regni Dei, si sic dici potest, sub Typo Esther & Assueri Regnum quippè Dei consistit in Potestate & Misericordia, semel locutus est Deus duo haec audiui, quia potestas Dei est, & [...] Domine Misericordia. Potestate Domino remanente, cessit quodam­modò Misericordiae pars Christi Matti Sponsaeque regnanti. Hinc ab Ecclesia tota Regina Misericordiae saluta­tur. E Cassand. d. Offic. Bon. viri. An non apertè scribit Gabriel Biel, vir alioqui non indoctus nec ineptus, Patrem Coelestem dimidium Regni sui de [...] beatissimae Virgini Coelorum Reginae, idque in Esther significatum fuisse, cui dictum sit ab Assuero, etiam si dimidium Regni [...] petieris dabitur tibi: ita Patrem Coelestem cum habet Iustitiam & Misericordiam, tanquam potiora Regni sui bona, Iustitia sibi retenta, Misericordiam [...] Matri consesisse. [...]. Psalt. B. Virg. Deus luditium tuum Regi da, & Misericordiam tuam Reginae [...] eius., Bonauenture, Gerson, Gabriel Biel, [Page 362] Antoninus, Bernardinus, Gorrhan, Holcoth, Rutilius Benzonius, A Blasius Viegas, Osorius, Paulus Cararia.

Bonauenture saith, O God, giue thy Iudgement to the King (thy Sonne) and thy Mercie to the Queene, his Mother. Gerson, Gorrhan, &c. say, The B. Virgin is so magnified at this day, that shee may rightly be called the Queene of Heauen, yea, and of Earth; for shee hath preheminence and iufluxiue vertue ouer all. Shee hath the moitie of Gods Kingdome (if one may presume to say so) vnder the Type of Hester and Assuerus: For the (whole) Kingdome of God con­sisteth of Power and Mercie; and Power being reserued to God him­selfe, the moitie of the Kingdome, to wit, Mercie, is shared (after a B sort) with the Mother and Spouse of Christ, reigning (together with her Sonne.)

Benzonius saith, Benzo. in Cant. Magnif. lib. 1. c. 18. Regnum Dei vni­uersum Iustitia & Misericordia duab' quasi partibus con­stituitur, & ordi­natur, iuxta illud Psal. 84. Misericor­dia & Veritas ob­uiauerunt fibi, Iu­stitia & Pax oscu­lata sunt. Deus igitur vt honoraret Matrem sui Filij, quasi diuidens hu­iusmodi Regnum Iustitiam, sibi & Filio reseruauit, constituens illum Iudicem vniuerso­rum, arguentemque mundum, de Peccato, de Iustitia, & de Iuditio, &c. Alteram Regni partem, quae Misericordia D regitur, & circundatur, Reginae [...] concessit. Sic Assuerus, Reginae [...], dimidiam partem Regni obtulit dicens: Quid petis vt detur tibi, & pro qua re postulas? Etiam si dimidiam partem Regni mei petieris, impe­trabis, Esther 5. Quod si Raguel dimidiam partem de omnibus quae [...], concessit Tobiae, faciens hanc Scripturam, vt pars dimidia quae supererat post obitum eius, Tobiae [...] deueniret, Tab. 8. Cur non Chri­stus, Mariae? Moyses, Exod. 24. Dimidiam partem sanguinis victimarum, quas Filij Israel imolauerant, ac­cepit & misit in Crateras: partem autem residuam fudit super Altare: Sic Deus quasi dimidiam Regni, hoc est sanguinis Christi partem illam, nempè ex qua Misericordia emanat, in cratere & vase admirabili Mariae po­suit, & conclusit: residuam partem, Iustitiae nempè, essusam super Altare, id est, Christum relinquens. The whole Kingdome of God consisteth of Iu­stice and Mercie, as it were of two Moities, Psal. 84. Now, to the end that God might honour his Mother, diuiding as it were his King­dome, he hath reserued Iustice to himselfe and his Sonne, &c. and the other part of his Kingdome, which is gouerned and compassed with Mercie, he hath graunted to the Queene his Mother. Euen as King Assuerus offered halfe of his Kingdome to Queene Esther, and as Raguel graunted halfe of his goods to Tobia, &c. as Moses, Exod. C 24.6. tooke halfe of the bloud and put in Basins, and halfe of the bloud he sprinkled on the Altar: so Cod put (as it were) halfe of his Kingdome, that is, that part of the bloud of Christ from which Mercie floweth, into the admirable Vessell and Basin, the Virgin Ma­rie; and the other part, to wit, of Iustice, which was poured vpon the Altar, he hath left vnto Christ. Thus writeth Benzonius, a famous Romane, both by birth and Religion, in our dayes.

Blasius Viegas Vieg. in Apoc. cap. 12. Com. 2. Sect. 2. Illud quod Rex Assuerus ob­tulit Esther, Quid vis Esther Regina, quae est petitio tua? Etiamsi dimidiam partem Regni petieris, dabitur tibi, Esther 5. Id completum fuit in Virgine. Cui nimirum Deus dedit dimidium Regni sui. Regnum quippe Dei, duobus ait contineri Potentia & Misericordia iuxta illud, Psal. 61. Duo haec audiui, quia potestas Dei est, & [...] Do­mine Misericordia: Potestate igitur Deo remanente, cessir [...] Misericordiam Dei [...], Sponsaeque regnanti. Itaque Virginem diuisum habere cum Deo imperium, & [...] Ecclesiam appellare [...] Ma­trem, ac Reginam Misericordiae., a moderne Iesuit, applyeth also this absurd comparison of Assuerus and Esther, to Christ and the Virgin Marie. And these Authors, with the rest whom they follow, E [Page 363] doe not intend onely to teach, That the blessed Virgin is very gra­cious A with Christ, in respect of her intercession, but that shee hath a right and authoritie, as a Queene Regent Bernardin. Ma­rial. p. 3. d. Nom. Mar. Ser. 2. Excel. 3. Beata virgo est Imperatrix coeli & terrae, &c. Imperat filio ratione mater­nalis iurisdictionis., to distribute mercie and benefits, where shee pleaseth, and to dispence with the Lawes of Iustice, when there is cause: as appeareth by the words of Ozorius the Osorius tom. 4. Conc. d. sing. De­uot. B. [...]. Ma­ter mea in regno meo principatur, non vt alij electi, sed tanquam mater & [...], ac Domina, & proinde potest dispensare in legibus à me latis, cum iusta intercesserit causa. Bri­get. Reuel. lib. 7. cap. 13. Iesuite, citing out of Nunne Bridgets Reuelations, Christs words following: My mother in my Kingdome, ruleth as a Queene, &c. and therefore shee may dispence with Lawes made by me, when there is iust cause: And by this speech, Nunne Bridget intendeth to shew, that Christ did vse the helpe of his mother Marie, in ruling his Kingdome; now this Osorius was a Iate Preacher in B Portugall.

Our English Iesuits, when they returne to vs, dissemble and cloake this Superstition, not because they dislike it (for they and the rest are all Birds of a feather, and feed their silly chicks with the same carraine,) but they prudently consider, that such notorious blasphemies, being published, would appeare odious, and hinder their successe in beguiling vnstable soules, C and minister greater aduantage to their Aduersaries: there­fore like the Steward in the Gospell (commended for his craft, but not for his honestie) when their Tenet is an hundred, they write downe fiftie, and when their Doctrine is blasphemous, they confesse a pettie ouersight, or vnfitnesse in the phrase and manner of speaking. But if in good earnest they disliked the former assertions, why hath not the grand Senior of Rome, (siue cum Concilio, siue sine Concilio) condemned, rased, and pur­ged out these sacrilegious blasphemies? especially, because in D other Authours, their expurgatorius Index hath Eagles eyes, and a line or sentence cannot escape these Critickes, if there appeare obloquitie, or antipathie to their inueterate forgeries.

Now for a Conclusion of the former Question, let it be ob­serued, That the Aduersarie is deficient in the demonstration of his Popish Tenet, concerning Inuocation of blessed Saints and Angels, for he hath produced no Diuine Testimonie from sacred Scripture, no Tradition from the Apostles, no plaine and resolute definition of approoued Councels, or Primatiue Fathers, no sufficient argument of naturall reason: yea, the mayne Principles of his Doctrine, are litigious and dubious, E amongst Pontificians themselues. Hee hath strugled, playing fast and loose with our Arguments, and spent himselfe in sol­uing, or rather in eluding of obiections: but he confirmeth not [Page 364] his owne. S t. Augustine Aug. d. Bapt. c. Don. l. 2. c. 3. saith, That in things (diuine or) which A concerne saluation, they offend grieuously, Qui certis incerta preponunt, which preferre vncertainties, before that which is in­dubitate. Nostra fides certa est, ex Doctrina Apostolica, & nouo & veteri Testamento confirmata Athanas.: Our faith, concerning the direct inuocation of the deitie, by Christ our Mediatour of interces­sion, is right, and a certaine Apostolicall Doctrine, confirmed by the Old and New Testament. The Popish Appendix, con­cerning Inuocation of Saints, wanteth all Scripture Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 7. Non expextamus testi­monium quod da­tur ab hominibus, sed voce Domini probamus quod quaeritur, quae est magis fide digna, quam quaeuis demonstrationes, vel potius quae est sola de­monstratio: per quam scientiam, qui solum quidem gustauere Scripturas sunt fideles. proofe; and whatsoeuer else may be pretended for it, is dubious and li­tigious: therefore our Doctrine is of faith, and the Popish Te­net, B of humane opinion or presumption.

THE FOVRTH POINT. A THE LITVRGIE, AND B PRIVATE PRAYERS FOR THE IGNORANT, IN AN vnknowne Tongue.

IESVIT.

THe Custome of the Romane C Church, in this Point, is agreeable to the Custome of the Churches in all ages, and also of all Churches now in the world, bearing the name of Christian, though opposite vnto the Romane (only those of the pretended reformation excepted;) which constāt concurrence, is a great figne, that the same is very conforme D vnto reason, and not any where forbidden in Gods Word, which will easily appeare, if we looke particularly vnto the same.

ANSVVER.

YOu lay your foundation of this Article, vpon two apparant vntruths: for the Doctrine and custome of the present E Romane Church, is not onely not agree­able, but opposite, both to the Doctrine and Practise of the antient Catholicke Church, and also to the custome of other Churches (which are not absolute Protestants.)

[Page 356] First, It is the common voyce of the Fathers, That the Li­turgie A and Seruice of the Church, was in their dayes, and ought to be vsed in a knowne tongue. Origen saith Orig. c. [...] lib. 8. Germane Christiani, nè vsita­tis quidem in sacra Scriptura Dei no­minib' vtuntur in­tèr praecandum, sed Graeci Graecis, Ro­mani Romanis, sin­guliquè praecentur propria lingua, De­umquè celebrent pro viribus, & om­nium linguarū Do­minus, omnib' lin­guis praecantes ex­audit, tàm variè lo­quentes, haud se­cus quam consonos (vt ità dicam) & v­nius vocis homines intelligens., That in his dayes, euery nation prayed to God in their owne Language, the Grecians in Greeke, the Romanes in Latine, and all other people in their proper tongue. Iustin Martyr Justin. Apol. 2. [...], &c., Tertullian Tertul. Apol. c. 39. Coimus [...] coetum & cogregationem, vt ad Deum quasi manufacta, praecationibus ambiamus orantes., Clemens A­lexandrinus Clem. Alex. Strom. li. 7., affirme, That the Priest and the people prayed ioyntly, and in common in the publicke Seruice, which argueth that the peo­ple vnderstood the Prayers. And S t. Cyprian Cyp. d. Orat. Dom. n. 22. Quandò stamus ad orationem fratres dilectissimi vigilare & incumbere ad praeces toto corde debemus, &c. Ib. Quomodò te audiri à Deo postulas cum te ipse non audias? &c. requires, That peoples hearts and words agree, and that they heare and vnderstand themselues, when they pray to God. Saint Basil saith Basil. li. Quest. ex Var. Script. loc. q. 278. Cum ignota fuerint praesentibus verba orationis, in fructuosa est mens orantis cum nemo vtilitatem capiat., When the B words of Prayer are not vnderstood by them which are present, the minde of the Precant is vnfruitfull, neither doth any man hereby reape any profit: S t. Chrysostome Chrys. 1. Cor. Hom. 35., S t. Ambrose Ambros. sup. 1. Cor. c. 14. Quem potest habere [...] qui ignorat quae loquatur &c. Imperi­tus audiens quod nòn intelligit, nescit finem orationis. Quid prodest vt quis lingua loquatur, quam solus scit, vt qui audit nihil proficiat., affirme the like. And S t. Augustine Aug. sup. Psal. 18. conc. 2. requireth people to vnderstand what they pray and sing, for if there be onely sound of voyce without sence, they may bee compared to Parrats, Owsells, or Popiniayes. And some of the best learned Papists, to wit, Thomas Aquinas Aquin. sup. 1 Cor. 14. sect. 5., Lyra Lira. in 1. Cor. c. 14. Caeterū hic consequentèr idem ostendit in oratione publica. Quià si [...] intelligat orationēseu benedictioné Sacerdotis; meliùs reducitur in Deum, & deuoti' respondet amen, &c. Propter quod in Primitiua Ecclesia bene­dictiones & caetera communia [...] in vulgari., Cassander [...]. [...]. ca. 28. Canonicampraecem & impri­mis Dominici corporis & sanguinis consecrationem ità veteres legebant, vt à populo intelligi, & Amen ac­clamari posset., acknowledge, That in the Primatiue Church, the common Seruice was vsed in the vulgar tongue. C

Secondly, it is false, according to the Tenet of Bellarmine D himselfe Bellarm. Re­cog. li. d. Verb. Dei, 2. ca. 16. Sunt inter Ruthenos & Arme­nos Catholici, vt etiàm intèr [...] sunt Maronitae Ca­tholoci, qui tamen diuina officia, non celebrant Graecè, vel Hebraicè, vel Latinè., that all other Churches, which differ from the Pro­testants, haue their publique seruice in Hebrew, Greeke, or La­tine. Bellonius and Aluares affirme the contrarie of the Arme­nians Petrus. Bel­lon. E Obseru. li. 3., and Abissines [...]. [...]. Hist. AEthiop.; and Eckius, of the Indians Eckius. Enchir.; and Sigis­mundus Baro Sigism. Baro. hist. Moscou., and Hosius Ho­sius. d. Sacr. Vernac. Apud Russos neque Graecae, neque Latinae linguae in sactis vsus est,, of the Russians; and Ledesma Ledesm. d. script. ling. vulg. ca. 33., of the Egyptians and Armenians. And AEneus Syluius reporteth, That when Cyrillus AEneas, Syluius Hist. Bohem. ca. 13. [...] Cyrillum, cum Romae ageret, Romano pon­tifici supplicasse, vt Sclauorum lingua eius gentis hominibus, quam [...], rem diuinam faciens vti possit. De qua re dum in sacro Senatu disceptaretur, essentquè non patici contradictores, auditam vocem tanquam de Coelo in haec verba missam. Omnis Spiritus laudet Dominum, & omnis lingua confiteatur ei. [...] datum Cy­rillo indultum. and Methodius had conuerted the Saluons vn­to Christ, & were suitors that they might administer the common. Pray­ers [Page 357] and Seruice among them in their vulgar tongue. The Pope in the A Conclaue consulting about this matter, a voice was heard, as it were from Heauen, saying, Let euerie Spirit praise the Lord, and let euerie tongue acknowledge him, and hereupon they were permitted to vse their owne tongue. And it appeareth by the Decretals, that the Roman Church in former times did ordinarily appoint this; for the words of the Canon are Decret. Gre. tit. 31. d. Offic. Iud. Ord. c. 14. Quoniā in plerisquè parti­bus intrà eandē ci­uitatem atquè Di­ocesim, permixti sunt, populi diuer­sarum linguarum, habentes sub vna side, varios ritus & mores, districte praecipimus, vt Pontifices huiusmodi [...] siue diocesium prouideant viros Idoneos, qui secundùm diuersitates rituum & linguarum, diuina illis officia celebrent, & Ecclesiastica Sacramenta ministrent., For as much as in many places within one Citie and one Diocesse, there be nations mingled to­gether, speaking diuers tongues, &c. We therefore commaund that the Bishops of such Cities and Diocesses prouide meet men to minister the holy Seruice, according to the diuersitie of their manners and tongues. B

Thirdly, it is repugnant to the nature and end of vocall Prayer Gabriel. in Can. Miss. lect. 62. B. Oporter quod vo­calis oratio, innotes cat populo, pro quo offertur. Quod [...] non potest, nisi sit vocalis. Debet nā ­què se populus in hac Ministris Ec­clesiae conformari. Ipsum Deūsecundū modum sibi possi­bilem deprecando. Et ideo rationabi­litèr statuit Eccle­sia, vt Ministri Ec­clesiae [...] o­rationes etiàm alta voce pronuncient, vt ad notitiam om­nium poterint per­uenire. The ends of vocall prayer set downe by Biel. 1. Excitatio interio­ris Deuotionis, 2. Mentis illuminatio. 3. Facilior recordatio rerum tempore orandi. 4. Mentis ab euagatione custodia. 5. Plenior debiti redditio, hoc est mente & corpore. 6. Redundantia quaedā ab anima in corpus, ex vehementi affectione, & deuotione. 7. Iustructio proximorū. Aquin. sup. 1. Cor. 14. Ille qui intelligit, reficitur & quantum ad intellectum, & quantum ad affectum: sed [...] eius qui non intelligit, est sine fructu refectionis. Ib. Quantum ad fructum deuotionis spiritualis, priua­tur qui non attendit ad ea, quae orat seu non intelligit., that the same should be exercised in a forme of words, which people that pray together vnderstand not; for prayer is an ascending of the mind to God Damasc. d. fid. lib. 3. cap. 24. Clem. Alex. [...] lib. 7.: and according to Aquinas Aquin. 22. q. 83. ar. 1. and other Schole-men Caiet. Ib. ar. 1. Richard. 4. d. 15. art. 4. q. 1. Gabr. in Can. Miss. Lect. 61. Nauar. En­chir. c. 1. n. 8.13. Azor. Moral. Instit. 1. li. 9. ca. 29. q. 3. Suar. d. Orat. c. 3. Nugnus. in 3. q. 85. ar. 4. Dub. 1. ad. 6., it is an action of the vnderstanding facultie; and in the same, people confesse their sinnes, and request of God such things as they haue need of A­lex. [...]. 4. q. 25. m. 1. ar. 1. Oratio est expressio desiderij, propter bonum adipiseendum vel malum remouendum, E informata per verbum interius velexterius. Ib. Resol. Duo sunt necessaria oranti, consideratio propriae miseriae, & [...] misericordiae, propria miseria consideranda est, ne pigritet implorare defectuum suorum supplementum. [...] misericordia consideranda est, nè de obtinendo quod sibi necessarium est, [...].. C They giue thankes for benefits spirituall and temporall, gene­ral and speciall, conferred vpon them: and the effect of prayer dependeth vpon their inward humiliation, and sence of their wants, 2. Chro. 34.27. Psal. 51.19. and vpon their speciall faith Aug. Epist. 121. Fides, Spes, & Charitas ad Deum perducunt orantem, hoc est credentem, sperantem, [...], & quae petat à Domino in Dominica oratione considerantem. in the diuine promises, Math. 9.28. Marc. 9.23. and Marc. 11.29. And Tertullian saith Tert. lib. d. Orat. c. 13. Deus [...] non vocis sed cordis [...], est, sicut conspector., God is not so much an hearer of the voice, as of the heart: But these things cannot be performed, where people vnderstand not what they confesse, request, or praise God for. And words are appointed to instruct, excite, D and edifie men; and if they vnderstand them not, to what vse serueth vocall prayer Aug Ep. 121. c. 11. Nobis ergo verba necessaria sunt, quibus [...], & inspiciamus quid petamus, non quibus Dominum seu docendum, seu flectendum esse credamus.? for we vse not words to teach God, but to instruct and excite our selues. And hereby the Popish [Page 368] euasion is answered, wherein they affirme, that euen as When a A Supplication is preferred to a King or Iudge, which the Suppliant vn­derstandeth not, it is all one in what language soeuer the same be, prefer­red the Iudge vnderstand it Ledesm. d. Scrip. Vern. ling. c. 13. Sicut enim qui aliquid à principi­bus petunt, nihil ad eos attinet, qua lin­gua mediatores ab eis constituti apud ipsum Principem negotium tractent, &c. Nequè etiā refert, qua lingua patronus, apud Iudicem causam clientis [...], &c.: So likewise because God vnderstandeth all languages, it mattereth not though people pray to him in a strange tongue; for our words in vocal prayer concern our selues mutu­ally & principally: but God himselfe requireth the vnderstan­ding and affection of our heart. Read S. Augustines words Aug. Epist. 121. ca. 11. Nobis ergo verba necessaria sunt quibus commoneamur, & inspiciamus quid petamus, non qui­bus B Dominum seu docendum seu flectendum esse [...]. Idem. d. Magist. c. 1. Non opus est locutione cum oramus, id est sonantibus verbis, nisi fortè sicut Sacerdotes faciunt, significandae mentis suae causa, non vt Deus exaudiat, sed vt homines audiant, & consensione quadam per commemorationem, suspendantur in [...]. Idem. d. Doctr. Chr. lib. 4. cap. 10. Quid prodest locutionis integritas, quam non sequitur intellectus audientis, cum lo­quendi nulla sit causa, si quod loquimur non intelligunt, propter quos vt intelligant loquimur. ci­ted in the margent.

Also the Iewes vnder the Law and the Prophets, prayed in a language which they vnderstood: our Sauiour and his Apo­stles, and the Primitiue Church did the like, and the gift of languages was bestowed vpon Pastors and people, in common, Act. 2.3.

Also the former Doctrine is so apparant, that some of the best C learned Romists teach, that publicke seruice, in a knowne lan­guage, is most fruitfull and conuenient. Caietan saith Caiet. in 1. Cor. 14. v. 17. Ex hac Pauli Doctrina habetur, quodmeli­us ad aedificationé Ecclesiae est, Orati­ones [...] quae audiéte populo di­cuntur dici lingua communi Clericis & populo quam di­ci Latinè., It appea­reth by S. Pauls Doctrine, that it is better for the edification of the Church, that common Prayers which are made in the hearing of the people, be said in a vulgar tongue, vnderstood indifferently by Priest and people, than in Latine. Lira saith Lira. in 1. Cor. 14. Si populus in­telligat orationem Sacerdotis, meliùs reducitur in Deum, & deuotiùs respondet, Amen., If the people vnderstand the prayer of the Priest, they are better brought to God, and they answere Amen with greater deuotion. And the reason hereof is manifest, for deuotion, compunction, desire, and affection, depend vpon vnderstanding, and follow the same Azor. Instit. Moral. tom. 1. lib. 9. c. 34. q. 8. Affectus [...] intellectum, vbi autèm nullus earum [...] quae petuntur vel dicuntur, habetur intelle­ctus, aut general tèr tantùm, ibi exiguus assurgit affectus., and the more distinct and D particular the vnderstanding of the obiect of these is, the more feruent and perfect the actions are.

IESVIT.

For we may imagine a triple state of Liturgie, in an E vnknowne tongue. The first in a language altogether vn­knowne, in which no man in the Church speakes, no man vn­derstands besides the celebrant himselfe, nor he neither, but by Enthusiasme or inspiration of the holy Ghost. Without [Page 369] question it is inconuenient that publique prayer should be A said in a language in this sort vnknowne, and this is proo­ued 1. Cor. 14. by the reasons the Apostle brings against an vnknowne tongue in the Church.

ANSWER.

This first imagination, is a Chimera, or [...]; for there was neuer in the world any such kind of common or ordinarie Ser­uice or Liturgie. And S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. condemneth in generall, the vse of vnknowne tongues in the congregation, vnlesse they B be interpreted, and referred to mentall edification. As for the vnlearned Ideot which is ready to ioine with the Priest in pray­er, what is it to him, whether the Priest speake by Enthusiasme, or by discipline, an vnknown language? his ignorance and im­possibilitie of speciall concurrence in prayer, is the same, as well in the one as in the other.

IESVIT.

Secondly, in a language vnknowne to most, euen of the C better sort of the Church, yet some know it, and other may with facilitie learne it. To vse a language in the Church for publique prayer in this sort vnknowne, cannot be proo­ued vnlawfull, nor forbidden by the Apostle, seeing the reasons brought by him against a language vnknowne, make not against this: For S. Paul reprehends in the publique 1. Cor. 14.16. Liturgie, a language vnknowne, as the Minister of the Church, that supplies the place of the Ideot and ignorant, D cannot vpon his knowledge of the goodnesse of the prayer, say thereunto Amen, in the name of them all. But when the language is knowne to some of the Church, and may with facilitie be learned of others, there is, or may easily be found one able to supplie the place of Jdeot, and ignorant, and an­swere in their person Amen, out of his intelligence of the prayer in that vnknowne tongue.

ANSVVER. E

That is forbidden by the Apostle to bee vsed in prayer, (and consequently it is vnlawfull) whereby all states and sorts of people being of ripe yeres, may not be edified in their vn­derstanding; and to which, being read pronounced or heard, [Page 370] they are not able to say Amen, hauing some distinct vnderstan­ding A of the things which are spoken, 1. Cor. 14.16, 17. 19, 20. but all states and sorts of people being of riper yeares, cannot be edified in their vnderstanding, neither are they able to say Amen, &c. to prayers which are heard by them, being read or pronounced in a strange language: Ergo, Common prayer read and pronounced in the Church in a strange tongue, is prohibi­ted by the Apostle, and consequently such forme of ordinarie prayer is vnlawfull. The Iesuit restraineth the words of S. Paul, either to the Minister supplying the place of the Idiot, or to the Clerke of the congregation. But the Apostle requireth, that B all those which ioyne in prayer, and among these the Idiots, and vulgar sort be edified in their minds, and they must pray, and giue thanks, vnderstanding the sence of words spoken, and vpon this vnderstanding, say Amen. And except (saith he) ye vtter by the tongue [...] significant words, or words carrying a perspicuous sence with them, ye shall speake in the ayre, and be as Barbarians to the hearers, v. 9.11. and the Idiot Suar. 3. Disp. 83. Sect. 1. mentioned by him, v. 16. is not the Priest, or the Clarke alone, but the vul­gar sort of people, ignorant of the language and words which are vsed in preaching, reading, or praying, as all the Fathers Chrys. Sup. 1. Cor. 14. Hom. 35. [...]. Oecumen. [...]. Theod. 1. Cor. 14. Ambros. ibid. Primasius. ib. Sedu­lius. ib. Anselm. idio­ta est ineruditus, qui nihil scit, nisi quod proprietas naturae dat. Haimo. ib. Dicitur idiota, proptiam liuguam D tantummodo sciens, in qua natus & nutritus est. Si igitur, talis astiterit tibi, dum aut mysterium Missae solem­niter celebras, aut sermonem [...], aut benedictionem tribuis, quomodo [...] Amen super tuam benedictio­nem?, C and sundry Pontificians Aquin. in 1. Cor. 14. Ledesm. d. script. c. [...]. idiotae graecè dicuntur plebei & ignari homines. deliuer, which comment vpon this text. As for the Latine, the same is as vncouth to a great part of the congregation, as to the Chineses: they can onely gape at it, and returne home from Masse and Mattens, as wise as they went, for ought they learne by the language. The old rule was, Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor vlli, and accordingly, your Masse Priests are meere barbarians, to the ordinarie sort of people.

IESVIT.

Notwithstanding, the Roman Church doth not approoue the vsage of a language in this sort vnknowne, as appea­reth by the late dispensation of Paulus the fift vnto Je­suits, to turne the Liturgie of the Masse into the vulgar lan­guage E of China, and to vse the same till the Latine lan­guage grow more knowne and familiar in that countrey. For though publike prayers in a language thus vnknowne, [Page 371] cannot be prooued vnlawfull, yet it is vndecent to vse a A language which to the whole multitude of the hearers may seeme barbarous and vncouth.

ANSVVER.

In the Roman Church vntill Lutber began more freelie to manifest your abuses to the world, palpable ignorance was so predominant in many places, that most Priests Explic. Cath. loc. Script. part. 3. Explic. 48. pa. 1155. Si peccatum est ab Ecclesia, potius pec­catum est quia plc­rique accersiti sunt qui neque intelli­gunt [...] quae orant & fantur, neque hi quid respondent vel ad quid respō ­dent. Biel. Can. Mis. lect. 62. Ios. Ang­les in 4. Sent. Ap­pend. ad poenit. d. Attent. q. 5. Diff. 2. Concl. 2 Multi elerici & Religiosi: & moniales Graece vel latine orantes, nec sensum verborum intelligunt, C nec intelligere possunt., and other re­ligious persons were ignorant of the latine tongue, and vnder­stood B not the Psalmes, lessons, and prayers which themselues read in the Church. Matthew Paris Math. Paris. Cronic. in Will. Conquest. pa. 7. Clerici quoque & ordinati adeo literatura carebant, vt caeteris esset stupori, qui Grammaticam didicisset. speaking of England saith, Clarkes and men in Orders were so illiterate, that he was a mirhor among his fellowes which had learned Grammer. Catherinus saith Catherin. Annot. Caietan. sup. 1. Cor. 14. Qui supplent locum Idiotae, plerumque non intelligunr quid oretur, verum etiam saepenumero nec [...] praesbyteri, aut Diaconi, qui orant, aut legunt.: Not only they which supply the place of the Idiot doe many times notvn­derstand what is prayed, but also Priests and Deacons themselues are ignorant of what they pray or reade. Ioseph Angles saith: Many Clerkes and religious persons, and Nunnes, pray in Greeke and Latine, which neither doe, nor can vnderstand the meaning of the words.

Neither is it held necessarie in our Aduersaries Tenet, that either Priest or people should vnderstand the seruice of the Church. For Suares saith Suares. 3. disp. 83. Sect. 1. Etiam nunc non est ne­cesse, vt minister linguam intelligat, in qua Missa dici, tur, &c., It is not necessarie at this day, for the Minister to vnderstand the language wherein the Masse is said, but it is sufficient that it be vttered in the faith of the Church. And Ledesma D saith Ledesm. d. Scrip. Qua vis ling. le­gend. ca. 13., Prayers and prayses, performed by them which vnderstand them not, are pleasing to God, and Christ: for if (saith he) Prayers profite such as are absent, and heare them not, much more shall they profit them which are present, though they vnderstood them not. This reason concludeth as well, that it is not necessarie for the people to be present at common seruice, nor yet that it is requisite they should so much as desire the prayers of the Church; for Infidels and Infants are many times benefitted by the Churches pray­ers, when they in their owne persons, by reason of tender E yeares, or ignorance, can require or wish no such thing. Now if one should argue as Ledesma the Iesuit doth, Prayers profite such as vnderstand nothing of prayer, and which desire not the Church to pray for them: Therefore it is not necessarie that common people shall know any thing in generall or particu­lar, touching the nature of prayer, or that they should desire to [Page 372] reape benefit by common prayer, he concludeth as firmely A from this antecedent, as the Iesuit doth from the former.

IESVIT.

Thirdly, a language may be tearmed vnknowne, be­cause it is not the vulgar, though most men of better sort vnderstand it. Such was antiently the Latine language in the whole Roman Empire, and now in the Latin Church; for not onely Priests vnderstand the same (or if some few B doe not, it is the fault of Bishops that or daine them) but al­so an innumerable companie of Lay men, not onely addicted to learning, but also other Gentlemen, yea manie of the vulgar, partly by reason of the affinitie their Mother tongue hath with the Latin, partly out of Education, which commonly when they are children they haue. How then can the Seruice or Liturgy in Latin be said absolutely to be in an vnknowne tongue, which the most part (besides women) C in some sort vnderstand? Moreouer the prayers which S. Paul speaketh of, were extempor all, made in publike mee­tings, according to the deuotion of the speaker: therefore it was necessarie that hee should pray in a knowne lan­guage, that those which heard him, might know when to say Amen; and whether the prayer for matter was such as they might lawfully say Amen therunto. But now theSer­uice and Liturgie of the Church hath set offices for euerie Festiuall day approoued by the Church, which by continu­all D vse, are made so knowne and so vulgar vnto common people, as no man is so ignorant that vsing diligence or at­tention, may not in short time come to vnderstand them. And hereunto serue exhortations, sermons, Catechismes, priuate instructions, Manualls and Primers in vulgar languages, where the prayers vsed for the Church are found; which shew that the latine seruice cannot be vn­knowne E to anie tbat will vse diligence to vnderstand it, neither can anie doubt, but that he may lawfully say Amen to it,

ANSVVER. A

The summe of this argument is; It is lawfull to make com­mon prayer in a language which most people vnderstand, but such is the Latine tongue: for (besides Women) Priests and Lay men, both Gentlemen and Plebeians, partly by educati­on, and partly by helpe of Sermons, Catechismes, and priuate instructions, &c. vnderstand Latine prayers.

Neither part ofthis argument is true. B

First, although the Moietie or Maior part of people in some congregarions, did vnderstand Latine Seruice, yet because a great part vnderstandeth it not, there is no reason (especially the thing required being good in it selfe) to respect one part with neglect and detriment of the other. For if many [...] in the congregation vnderstand Greeke, Latine, or French, shall it therefore be lawfull in an ordinarie course, to reade the holy Scriptures, or to make Sermons in these tongues, when as ma­nie or very many people are ignorant in these languages? The Papalls in their seruice, not onely reade their common Prayet, C but also the Lessons and Portions of holy Scriptures in the La­tine tongue, of which a great part of the affemblie is igno­rant.

Secondly, it is false, considering the state of the Church in generall, that the Maior part of people vnderstandthe Latin ser­uice, or that by Sermons, or Catechising, &c. they are [...] hereunto. Of the ignorance of Priests I haue formerly spoken, and manie learned Papists which maintaine Latine Seruice: hold it not generally necessarie for Priest or people to vnder­stand the words of the Seruice. Suares the [...] saith Suar. in 3. [...] 3. Dis. 83. Sec. 1. E­tiam nunc non est necesse vt minister linguam intelligat in qua Missa dici­tur., It is D not at this day necessarie for the Priest or Minister to vnderstand the language in which the Masse is said. And Ledesma saith Ledesm. d. Diu. Script. ca. 13. nu. 1. 10, 11, 12., Although the antient Church required that the Clergie should vnderstand that which they read andprayed, yet they sought not this in the people, ney­ther is it behoouefull for the people in what language the Priest saith Masse or prayeth for them; and euen as the children crying [...] in the Gospell, without knowledge of what they said, pleased our Saui­our, Matth. 21, so likewise God accepteth the prayers of people, al­though they vnderstand not what they aske or speake.

Thirdly, if according to your owne concession, it be expedi­ent E to haue vnlearned persons taught the sence of the publike seruice, by Catechismes, Manualls, and priuate instruction: then it is farre more reasonable to haue the same vttered in a vulgar language, because hereby there ensueth an immediate [Page 374] edification of all persons present at diuine seruice: and the A other meanes by Catechising, &c. is a going about the bush, the effect is vncertaine, and vnsufficient to affoord distinct vnder­standing of an vnknowne language.

IESVIT.

Now, that S. Paul did command that Seruice should be in such a language, as euery woman in the Church might bee able to vnderstand it word by word, is in­credible, B nor are our Aduersaries able to prooue it.

ANSWER.

A most ridiculous Paralogisme, for admitting, that S. Paul descended not precisely to euery single word, explained in such manner, that euery particular woman might at the first hea­ring vnderstand the same, yet the conclusion followeth not, That he commanded not the common Seruice should be in a knowne language.

First, your selues acknowledge that Preaching and Prophe­cying C should be in a knowne tongue: and yet euery word, or perhaps euery sentence cannot (speaking morally) bee vttered so plainely, that euery person shall at the first sight, distinctly conceiue the meaning.

Secondly, the ignorance of the distinct notion of euery word, hindereth not sufficient edification, when the ordinarie, necessarie, and common passages of the publike Seruice are intelligible.

IESVIT. D

Neither can they shew by any records of Antiquitie, that such a Custome was in the Primatiue Church; yea the contrarie may more than probably bee shewed, be­cause the drift of the Church, in appointing Liturgies, or set formes of publicke Prayer, at the Oblation of the Eu­charisticall Sacrifice, was not the peoples instruction, but for other reasons. E

First, That by this publike Seruice, a continuall daily tribute of homage, of Prayer, of Thankesgiuing, might be publikely offered, and paid vnto God.

[Page 375] Secondly, That Christians by their personall assistance A at this publicke Seruice, might protest and exercise ex­teriourly Acts of Religion, common with the whole Church, represented by the Synaxis or Ecclesiasticall meeting of eue­rie Christian Parish.

Finally, To the end that euerie Christian by his pre­sence, yeelding consent vnto the publicke Prayers, Prai­ses,! and Thankesgiuings of the Church, and as it were, subscribing and setting his Seale vnto them, by this as­sisting B at them, might ordinarily participate of the gra­ces, benefits, and fruits which the Church doeth ob­taine by her Liturgies and publicke Oblations. Now for this end, there is no need that euery one should vnder­stand word by word, the Prayers that are said in the publicke; but it suffiseth, that the Church in generall, and in particular, Pastours and Ecclesiasticall persons, de­dicated vnto the Ministeries of the Church, and who C watch, being bound to giue an account of soules commit­ted vnto their charge; haue particular notice of all the Prayers that are said, and that all that will, may be taught and instructed in particular, if they will vse diligence and desire it.

ANSWER.

We can prooue by Records of Antiquitie, that the publike D Seruice was ioyntly performed by the Ministers, and peo­ple, Just. Mart. Apol. 2. [...]. 2. Cor. Hom. 18. Basil. Hexam. Hom. 4. August. in Psal. 54. Ambros. Hex­am. lib. 3. cap. 5. Leo de ieiun. 7. mens. Serm. 3. [...]. [...] Eccles. Offic. lib. 1. cap. 10. Justinian. Nouel. Const. de Eccles. diuers. cap. Constit. 123. E in a language common to both. And the drift of the an­tient Church in their Seruice, was, that God might bee ho­noured by voyce, heart, and minde of all which were present, Iohn 4. 24. But God in the state of the Gospel, is not honou­red with dumbe shewes, and with lip labour, nor with Prayers and Praises which the Offerers vnderstand not.

The reasons which you produce to prooue, That it is not necessarie for vnlearned people to vnderstand the Common Seruice or Liturgie, are lame and disjointed.

First, Although the sole or principall end of appointing set [Page 376] formes of publicke Prayer, was not to teach or instruct people A in knowledge, but to worship God, &c. yet because the lat­ter cannot intirely be performed without the former, because they which come to God with sound of words, without sence and vnderstanding of matter, offer the sacrifice of fooles; therefore the placing of the one, excludeth not the other: for although the end of priuate Prayer, is to worship God, Psal. 50. 15. yet our Aduersaries themselues holde it requi­site Azor. Instit. Mor. tom. 1. lib. 9. c. 34. q. 8. Qui pri­uatim ac libere o­rant, consultius fa­cerent illi quidem, si ea lingua & ser­mone, mentem su­am coram Deo ef­funderent, quam rectius callent. Af­fectus enim conse­quitur intellectum: vbi autem nullus rerum earum, quae petuntur, vel dicuntur, habetur intellectus, aut gene­ralis tantum, ibi exiguus assurgit affectus. 795. August. Epist. 121. Qui [...] orare cupit, verba quae in­telligit conuenienter adhibet, vt seipsum ad Orationem internam excitet. Citat, Ledesma. de Sacr. ver­nac. cap. 14. pag. 102., that such Prayer be made in a knowne Language. Also, one end of celebrating and receiuing the holy Eucharist, is, to commemorate and shew foorth the Lords death, vntill his comming B againe, 1. Cor. 11. 25, 26: but without vnderstanding the Language wherein the Lords Supper is administred, peo­ple cannot call to remembrance, or shew foorth the Lords death, at least wisè so clearly and distinctly, as is fit for them to doe.

Secondly, A distinct and explicite inward deuotion, ioyned C with externall saying Amen, is more effectuall and pleasing to God, than a confused and generall. But when people vnder­stand the publike Prayers and Seruice of the Church, in a fa­miliar Language, they are inabled to conioyne distinctly and explicitly, inward and outward deuotion, mentall and vocall saying Amen. Therefore it is most expedient and necessarie for the Church, to celebrate Diuine Mysteries, and offer pub­licke Prayers, in a Language which the people vnderstand. D

IESVIT.

Moreouer the Churches antiently, euen in the purest Vid. Liturg. impress. Antuerp. an. 1560. Basil. in Liturg. fol. 34. Chrys. in Liturg. fol. 53. Basil. ibid. fol. 34.38.39.41.43. 46. Chrys. Hom. 61. ad Sop. times of Christianitie, had Chancells, into which, Lay­men might not enter, and so could not particularly, and distinctly vnderstand the Prayers said by the publicke Minister of the Church: within the said Chancels, they did also vse to say a good part of the Liturgie secretly, so E that their voyce was not audible vnto any; yea, the Greeke Church did antiently vse a vaile, wherewith the Priest was for the time of the sacred Oblation compassed about, [Page 377] which are manifest signes, that the Church did neuer A thinke it necessarie, that all the publicke Liturgie should be heard, much lesse word by word vnderstood by the whole vulgar multitude present thereat.

ANSWER.

It is not certaine at what time Chancells began, neither were all Lay Persons prohibited to enter: for the Emperour had his seate within the Chancell, vntill the dayes of Theo­dosius B the Elder, as Theoderit Theod. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 17. and Sozomene Sosom. Hist. Eccles. lib. 7. cap. 24. [...], &c. Concil. 6. Gene­ral. Can. 69. apud Caranz. Nulli omnium qui sit in Laicorum numero liceat intra sacrum Altare ingredi. Ab [...] tamen nequaquam prohibita potestate & authoritate Regia, quandoquidem voluerit, &c. report.

And although Lay persons were not seated in the Quire or Chancell, yet the Seruice was pronounced by the Ministers in that place, with an audible voyce, so as the people in the bo­die of the Church heard the same. Iustinian Justin. Imp. [...] No. Constit. 123. Iubemus vt omnes Episcopi pariter & Presbyteri, non ta­cito modo sed clara voce, quae a popu­lo exaudiatur, [...] oblationem, & praeces in Sancto Baptismate adhibi­tas celebrent, quo maiore exinde de­uotione in depro­mendis Domini Dei laudibus, au­dientium animi ef­ferantur. Ita enim & D. Apostolus do­cet dicens in 1. ad Cor. Epist. the Emperour made this Decree following: Wee command that all Bishops and C Priests, (within the Romane Monarchie) shall celebrate the sacred Oblation of the Lords Supper, &c. not in secret, but with a lowd and cleare voyce, that the mindes of the hearers may bee stirred vp with more deuotion to expresse the praises of the Lord God, for so tea­cheth the Apostle, 1. Cor. 14. Honorius Honor. in Gem. Animae. lib. 1. cap. 103. d. Canon. Fertur dum Canon pri­mitus publice quotidie recitaretur, ab omnibus per vsum sciretur, & cum eum Pastoresin in agro super panem, & [...] dicerent, repente carnem & sanguinem ante se inuenirent, atque inde diuinitus percussi interirent, vnde Synodali Decreto sub Anathemate praeceptum est, vt nullus Canonem dicat, nisi in libro, & in Sacris vestibus, & nisi super altare & super sacrificium. in gemma Animae, lib. 1. cap. 103. It is reported, that in antient time, when the Canon of the Masse was openly recited, &c. Iohn Billet Iohn Billet. d. diuin. Offic. Secreta dicitur, quia secreto pronun­ciatur, cum olim tamen alta voce diceretur, vnde & ab [...] bus Laicis sciebatur. Contigit igitur vt quadam die Pastores super lapidem quendam ponerent panem, qui ad horum verborum prolationem, in carnem conuer­sus est, forsan transubstantiatus est panis in corpus Christi, in quos diuinitus facta est [...] vindicta. Nam percussi sunt diuino iuditio caelitus misso, vnde statutum fuit, vt de caetero sub silentio diceretur, velideo ne vi­leseat, E sicut & sacra Scriptura ne vilescat., cited by Cassander, saith, In times past, the Masse was pronounced with a lowd voyce: whereupon Lay people knew the same, &c. And mumbling and whis­pering D in the Masse, is not much more antient than Pope Innocent the third.

The Liturgies also fathered vpon S. Basil, and S. Chrysostome, haue a knowne Mother (to wit, the late Roman Church:) but there is (besides many other iust exceptions) so great dissimili­tude betweene the supposed Fathers and the Children, that [Page 378] they rather argue the dishonest dealing of their Mother, than A serue as lawfull witnesses of that which the Aduersarie inten­deth to prooue by them Read Phil. Morn. d. Miss. & part. lib. 1. cap. 6. pag. 88. tit. Liturgiae huius Saeculi. Claud. Espenc. d. Miss. Priuat. pag. 220..

The Vaile in the Greeke Church, of which S. Chrysostome speakes, Hom. 61. ad Pop. Antioch. was not vsed to depriue the people of hearing, but it was a ceremonie, admonishing, and signifying, that prophane and vncleane persons were vnwor­thie to behold or pertake the sacred mysteries Chrys. Hom. 61. ad pop. Antioch. Cum audieris ore­mus omnes com­munitèr, cum vela videris retrahi, tūc supernè Coelum aperiri cogita, & Angelos descendere. Sicut itaquè prophanorum fas est adesse neminem, ità nec vllum quidem Sacratorum & Sordidorum, &c. Indigni sunt & oculi [...] hisce spectaculis, indignae sunt & aures, si bestia inquit tangat montem lapidabitur.. And as this Father sheweth, Hom. 3. in Ephes. Idem. sup. Ephes. Ho. 3. [...]., the drawing open of the B curtaines signified the opening of Heauen, and the descending of Angels at the celebration of the holy Eucharist.

Metrophanes a Monke of Greece [...]., E in a certaine tractate, te­stifyeth the forme or vse of the Vaile or Curtaine in the East Church to be, That the Priest may within or vnder the same, prepare aforehand the things requisit for the administration of C the Sacrament: and when this is done, then the Canopie is drawne, at the pronouncing of the holy Creed (which is vttered with a loud voice, euen as all other parts of the Liturgie are, that all people may heare.) Now this action signifieth (according to Dio­nisius) that God reuealeth these mysteries, to those only which are Orthodoxall in Faith, and hee communicates his diuine grace to none but those which are sound in the diuine worship, and to such all things are manifested, whether men or women, poore or rich, &c. The Iesuit therfore is ignorant of the reason, wherefore the Greeke Church vseth a Canopie, and shutteth D and openeth the same at the holy Communion; for the same was not done to take away audience of any part of the Seruice from lay people (for the whole Liturgie from the beginning to the ending was pronounced with a loud voice) but to ad­monish and signifie the due preparation which all persons were to vse when they pertake the sacred mysteries.

IESVIT. A

Besides it is certaine, that the Scripture was not read in any language but Greeke, ouer all the Church of the East, Hieron. praefat. in Paralip. Basil. d. Spir. sanct. cap. 29. Hieron. in proem. 2. li. com. ad Galat. Act. Apost. cap. 2. & 10. & 11. & 14. Hiero. [...] viris [...]. in Anton. Theoderit. in Histor. SS. Patr. Hist. 13. Aug. Epist. 57. & d. Doctr. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 13. Aug. in Psal. 123. & in Exposit. Epist. ad Rom. & li. 2. contrà [...]. li. 83. as S. Hierom witnesseth. Also the Greeke Liturgie of S. Basil was vsed in all the Church of the East, and yet the Grecian was not the vulgar language of all the Countries of the East, as is apparant by manifest testimonies of the Cappadocians, Mesopotamians, Galatians, Lycaonions, B Egyptians, Syrians; yea that all these countries, and most of the Orient had their proper language distinct from the Greeke, is manifest out of the Acts of the Apostles. No lesse manifest is it, that the Latine Liturgie was common anti­ently for all the Churches of the Westerne parts, euen in Africke, as appeareth by testimonies of Augustine: but it is manifest, that the Latine was not the vulgar language for all nations of the West. And though the better sort vn­derstood C it, yet some of the vulgar multitude onely knew their owne mother tongue, as may be gathered out of the same S. Augustine, who writes that he pleading in Latine against Cryspinus a Bishop of the Donats, for possession of a village in Africke, whereunto the consent of the villagers was required, they did not vnderstand his speech, till the same was interpreted to them in the vulgar African lan­guage. So that the Christian Church did neuer iudge it re­quisit, D that the publique Liturgie should be commonly tur­ned into the Mother language of euery nation, nor necessa­rie, that the same should be presently vnderstood word by word by euerie one of the vulgar Assistants, neither doth the end of the publique diuine Seruice require it.

ANSWER.

Omitting things doubtfull, this is apparant, that common E people both of the East and West, had the vse of the Scrip­tures in such a language as they vnderstood; for otherwise the Fathers would not haue exhorted them to read the holy Scrip­ture, but such exhortations are most frequent in S. Chrysostome, S. Hierome, and in other Fathers, Read before, pag. 279.

[Page 380] And that the people of Asia vnderstood Greeke, and the A Africans Latine, is prooued by the learned of our part, out of many Authors Reade Doct. Bilson of Christ, subiect. pa. 647. &c. Morn. d. Miss. lib. 2. cap. 6.; and where this was wanting, people had Translations and Seruice in their natiue tongue Orig. c. Cels. [...]. 8. Theod. Hist. Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 27. [...]. lib. 3. cap. 15. Basil. Epist. ad Neo­caes. 63. Hier. ad Heliod. Epitaph. Nepotian. & Epist. ad Eustoch. Epi­taph. Paul. Aug. Confess. lib. 1. cap. 14. Orig. in Leuit. Hom. 5. Basil. praef. in Psal [...]. Epist. 18. Chrys. in Epist. ad Coloss. Hom. 9.. Also such people as were conuerted to Christianitie, if they wanted Translations in their Mother tongue, were careful to learne the ordinarie language, in which diuine Seruice was vsed, and wherein the holy Scriptures were commonly read. But what proofe can the Aduersarie make, that Christian people (altoge­ther ignorant of the language vsed in the publique Seruice) came into those congregations, and were pertakers of the ho­ly B Sacraments?

IESVIT.

As for the comfort that some few want, in that they do not so perfectly vnderstand the particulars of diuine Seruice, it may by other meanes bee aboundantly supplied, C without turning the publique Liturgies into innumerable vulgar languages, which would bring a mightie confusion into the Christian Church.

First, the whole Church should not be able to iudge of the Liturgie of euerie countrie, when differences arise about the Translation thereof, so diuers errours and here­sies may creepe into particular countries, and the whole Church neuer able to take notice of them. D

Secondly, particular countries could not be certaine that they haue the Scripture truely translated; for thereof they can haue no other assured proofe, but onely the Churches approbation, nor can she approoue what she doth not vn­derstand.

Thirdly, were vulgar Translations, so many as there be languages in the world, it could not be otherwise but that some would be in many places ridiculous, incongru­ous, E and full of mistakings, to the great preiudice of soules, specially, in languages that haue no great extents, nor many learned men that naturally speakethem.

Fourthly, the Liturgies would be often changed toge­ther [Page 381] with the language, which doth much alter in euerie A age, as experience sheweth.

Fiftly, in the same countrie, by reason of different dia­lects, some prouinces vnderstand not one another. And in the island of Iaponia, as some write, there is one language Turselin. in vita Za­uerij. for noble men, another for rustickes, another for men, an­other for women. Into what language then should the Iaponian Liturgie be turned?

Finally, by this vulgar vse of Liturgie, the studie of B the two learned languages would bee giuen ouer, and in short time come to be extinct, as we see that no antient lan­guage now remaines in humane knowledges, but such as haue beene as it were incorporated in the publique Litur­gies of the Church, and the common vse of learned tongues being extinct, there would follow want of meanes for Christians to meet in generall Councells, to communicate one with another in matters of Faith. Jn a word, extreame C Barbarisme would be brought vpon the world.

ANSVVER.

They cannot be some few onely in this case, but the maior part, yea an hundred to one, which want the benefit and com­fort of the holy Scriptures, and publique Seruice of the Church. And to supplie this want, by preaching or priuate in­struction, it is (morally speaking) impossible, & it may be perfor­med more compendiously and easily, if Papists would chuse D rather to follow S. Pauls doctrine, 1. Cor. 14. than stifly to ad­here to the late custome of the Roman Church.

Now the reasons which the Aduersarie and his consorts vse, to prooue the inconuenience of Translations, &c. are no other than such as will make against Preaching and Catechi­sing in a knowne tongue, as well as vsing publique Seruice in the same. For are Romists able to translate Catechismes, Homi­lies, Meditations, and priuate Prayers into a vulgar tongue, and to accommodate all sorts of people according to the diuersitie of their languages, without detriment to the common Faith, E and shall it be impossible to do the like in translating Scripture, and the Seruice of the Church? And to the reasons, I answer.

First, the whole Church, whensoeuer it is requisite, may iudge of translated or peculiar Liturgies, by the helpes of the learned and iuditious, who vnderstand both the vulgar lan­guage [Page 382] of the place, and also Latine or other Language, fit for A Ecclesiasticke communication.

Secondly, It may take notice of heresies, and iudge of Trans­lations, by the same meanes. And in the third, fourth, fift, and sixt place, as the obiected inconueniences are preuented in Preaching, Catechising, and priuate Prayers, so they may bee preuented in publicke Liturgies, yea, God Almightie will giue a blessing, and bee assistant to such as obserue his owne Ordi­nance. The same also would be so farre from causing Igno­rance and barbarisme in the world, that nothing could more increase good literature, and polish barbarous Languages, than B the often comparing of one Language with another, and the re­fining and inlarging of that which is rude, and ouer-narrow and sparing, out of Tongues more ample and elegant. Experience teacheth this in Great Britaine, whose deficient and rude na­tiue Language, by meanes of all sorts of Translations, is made most polite and copious.

IESVIT.

Priuate Prayer for ignorant people in their vulgar Lan­guages, C we practise, we allow; yea, the Pater noster and the Creed, are to be knowne of all in their mother Tongues, which two formes containe the whole substance of Prayer: For the end of Prayer being threefold, to praise God for his infinite perfections, to giue him thankes for his benefits be­stowed vpon vs, to demand of him such necessaries as we want, as well for the maintaining of this present, as for the attaining vnto eternall life: The Creed being a summe of the D perfections of God, and his benefits towards man, affoords sufficient knowledge to complie with the two former ends of Prayer; and the Pater noster being an abridgement of all those things which we need, containes a full instruction for the third. Other Prayers doe but more plainely expresse things contained in the Pater noster and the Creed, and our many Bookes doe shew, that these kind of Prayers in vulgar Languages, are by vs written, esteemed, and practised. We E adde, that ordinarily speaking, Common people doe more pro­fit by saying Prayers in their mother tongues, than in the Latine; because not onely their affections are mooued vnto pietie, but also their vnderstanding edified with knowledge. [Page 383] Notwithstanding, some Prayers, though translated into A English, be so difficile to be vnderstood, as they will rather distract ignorant (especially curious people) than instruct; of which kind, are many Psalmes of Dauid: and these Prayers (as wee thinke) may more profitably be said in La­tine. So that I see no great difference either in practise, or in Doctrine, betweene Protestants and the Romance Church, concerning priuate Prayers in a Language vnknowne.

ANSVVER. B

The Opposition of Protestants hath brought you to this Antonin. sum. mor. Tit. 23. c. 9. §. 5. Praeces in ore Lai­corum, qui igno­rant sensum, tantū valent quantum in ore sacerdotum in­telligentium: sicut Lapis praetiosus ae­què valet in manu eius, qui ignorat virtutem., and yet you enterfere in your Tenet: for many of your fellowes teach, That it is not necessarie to make priuate Prayer in a knowne Language. And as you permit vulgar Translations of holy Scripture, rather to satisfie the importunitie of people, than for any good will you beare the Scripture: so likewise, if your Kingdome were as absolute in the World, as sometimes it was, wee may iustly suspect, that you would recall your later C Indulgences, and reduce each thing to the old Center.

But taking you at the best, it [...] strange to vs, that you should approoue a knowne Tongue as most fit for priuate Prayer, and account the same a Canker in the publike Liturgie. One of your Order is not ashamed to traduce our Seruice, be­cause it is vsed in a common Language, as pernicious, prophane, sacrilegious, detestable, and opposite to all Religion, and Apostolicall Tradition Ledesm. Iesu­ita. d. Diu. Script. & Miss. Quauis Lingua, c. 1. Eorum temerariam, & im­piam, tantoque ip­sorum [...] có­sensu receptam có­suetudinem. Quo­ties execranda illa sua sacra peragunt. Cultum tam perni­ciosum, &c. De hac iam execranda, Sa­crilega, & Aposto­lorum Traditioni contraria, vulgari Missae & Officio­rum diuinorum ce­lebratione, ac publicae Ecclesiae Orationis vernaculae Linguae, prophana recitatione.. But hauing examined whatsoeuer this Author, or your selfe can say, I obserue in neither of you so much as one probable Argument, to support the high conceit you haue of D your Roman Seruice, and the partiall respect, or rather despect, you carrie against ours. It is Custome therefore, and not Veri­tie, which hath emboldened you; and you leane vpon a broken Reed, when you ground your Faith, in this and other Questi­ons, vpon the [...] of the Trident Synod. Sapientiam sibi adi­munt, qui sine iudicio inuenta maiorum probant, & ab alijs more pecu­dum ducuntur (saith Lactantius [...]. d. Orig. Error. lib. 2. cap. 8.:) They remooue wisedome from themselues, which without iudgement maintaine the in­uentions of their Elders, and which like Animals are led by o­ther mens Deuices. E

THE FIFTH POINT. A REPETITIONS OF B PATER-NOSTERS, AVES, AND CREEDS, ESPECIALLY affixing a kind of Merit to the number of them. C

IESVIT.

I Am persuaded, that your Maiestie doth not intend to dislike Repetition of Prayers, so the same be done with renewed Deuotion, and Affection. For this Repetition is iustified, not onely by the exam­ple D of the blind man, who still cryed vpon our Sauiour, with Repetition of the same Prayer, Iesu fili Dauid, miserere mei, by which Repetition he ob­tained Luc. 18. v. 29. his sight: Nor onely of the Princely Prophet, who in his 135. Psalme repeats 27 times, Quoniam in aeter­num Isa. 6. misericordia eius: Nor onely of the Seraphins, who in praysing their Creator, repeat three times ouer the same E word, Holy, Holy, Holy: But also by the example of Matth. 26. v. 4. Mar. 14.39. eundem Sermonem dicens. Luc. 22. 42. our most blessed Sauiour himselfe, who thrice at the least in the Garden repeated the same Prayer, Pater si fieri po­test transeat à me Calix iste, veruntamen non mea vo­luntas [Page 385] sed tua fiat. Wherefore to repeat the same Prayers, A is very good and pious, so the same be done with new Deuo­tion; which new deuotion, that it may not be wanting, there is appointed for euery Pater noster, Aue, and Creede, a speciall Meditation that may stirre vp new deuotion, at euery repeated praier; and seeing we cannot pray long, but we must needs repeat ouer the Pater noster in sence: for what can we demand of God, that is not there contey­ned? Why may wee not also repeate the same in words? B

ANSVVER.

TWo points are contro­uerted in this Article: First, Whe­ther the repetitions of Creedes, A­ues, and Paternosters, according C to the formes prescribed in Primers and Rosaries, is a conuenient meanes to honour God, and the Saints? Se­condly, Whether the same be me­ritorious and satisfactorie? Concer­ning the first, the Iesuit vseth this argument, Sundry examples are extant in holy Scripture, of repetitions vsed in prayers and thanksgi­uing, to wit, Luc. 18, 38, 39. Esa. 6. 3. Psal. 136. Math. 26. 39. to 45. Marc. 14.39. Luc. 22. 42. Ergo, Repetition of Paterno­sters, Creedes, and Aues, according to the formes prescribed in the Ro­mish D Primers and Rosaries, are pious and lawfull.

I answer: Granting that repetitions in prayer, and thanksgiuing which agree with the examples of sacred Scripture, are pious and lawfull: but the Illation from these to the Roman Battalo­gees is inconsequent, because the repetitions in question, differ from the patterne expressed in holy Scripture. First, in the kind and obiect, for this latter are in part directed to creatures, and not onely to the Creator, and of this deuotion there is no ex­ample in Scripture. Secondly, they are multiplyed to an ex­cessiue E and portentuous number Suar. d. Orat. li. 3. ca. 9. Integrum Rosarium centum quinquaginta salutationibus virginis constat, interpositis pro quindecim denarijs, quindecem orationibus Dominicis: corona vero constat septuaginta [...] Aue, & septem paternoster, quae a pijs hominibus inuenta [...] in memoriam, & honorem totidem annorum, quos in hac vita virginem [...] probabile est, & ideo [...] est corona haec oratio, quia perfectum circulum vitae virginis representat. [...]. d. Deipar. virg. lib. 3. c. 10. Quibusdam placit quinquagies duntaxat, alijs frequentius, virginem ex more [...], intermixta [...] pecatione., and doubtlesse the Romists [Page 386] exceede and transcend their Suar. d. Orat. li. 3. ca. 9. In rudi­mentis fidei, solet poni Symbolum Apostolorum sed illud non continet formam orandi, sed confitendi fi­dem. brethren the Pharisees, in the Canis. d. Deip. virg. li. 3. c. 10. Fatemur in hac salutatione vt ab Angelo recitata est, precationis formu­lam non extare. A number and vaine repetition, of such superstitious Orisons. Thirdly, the Creed and Aue-maries are Censur. Colon. Dial 6. Orationem Dominicam illis fundimus, non tam ipsos tunc allo­quentes, quam Deum ad quem ipsorum manibus eam cupimus deferri, tanquam qui cum gratiores deo sint, facile quod cupimus impetrabunt. Iosep. Ang. Appen. in 4. q. 7. diff. 7. Hinc sequitur, orantes & offerentes eis B pater noster, & Aue Maria, non errare: quia non offerunt verba sanctis, sed pater noster Deo, & Aue Maria virgini, ad honorem Sanctorum, quorum patrocinium postulant: & viri Idiotae quamuis actualiter non refe­rant haec verba vt diximus, virtualiter tamen offerunt, quia si rogarentur de sua intentione, dicerent esse ean­dem cum intentione Doctorum virorum, & Ecclesiae. no prayers or thanks­uings, either formally or vertually. Fourthly, our A duersaries maintaine, That if these repetitions be vsed, without vnderstan­ding of the words Suar. d. Orat. li. 3. c. 5. n. 3. Ios. Angles. 4. Append. d. Orat. q. 5. Attendere est ad id quod dicitur, mentem habere praesentem, nempe vt hoc versetur in corde quod profertur in ore., and consequently without present actuall attention Iac. d. Graph. Decis. Aur. p. 1. li. 2. c. 52. &c. 53. Suar. d. Orat. li. 3. c. 4. n. 7. 8. 17. Non est de ratione orationis vt cogiter orans, de ipsa loqutione, sed satis est si cogitet de Deo, cum quo loqui­tur. Item non est necessarium, cogitare de re significata [...] verba., they are pious and effectuall.

But the Romists cannot produce approoued examples out of holy Scripture, of such repetitions, and therefore their ar­gument from example concludeth not. It is also apparent that the repetitions which are practised among Papals in manner C aforesaid, doe rather resemble the superstitious Battalogie of the Pharisees, Math. 6.7. Ferus. Com. Matth. 6. Signan­ter dicit, nolite multum loqui, vt faciunt qui cum praeculas plures, aut Psalmos legerint, etiam sine assectu, putant sibi omnia salua, Deumque ipsis plurimum debere, cum ta­men nihil minus faciant, quam orent. than the deuout prayers and thanks­giuings, recorded for our instruction in holy Scripture.

IESVIT.

Jf any thinke to merit by reason of the number of his D prayers, hee is ignorant of the doctrine of the Catholike Church, which attributes no merit to prayers, in regard of their number, further than the number awakes in vs de­uout thoughts, which is the onely thing that by the num­ber we aime at. Wee say Paters, Aues, and Creedes, to the number of three, in memorie of the blessed Trinitie, see­king Gods fauour and grace by glorifying that incompre­hensible Mystery: to the number of fiue, in memorie of the E fiue speciall wounds our Sauiour receiued, that pierced into, and through his sacred body: to the number of 33, in remembrance of the 33 yeares our Sauiour wrought our saluation vpon earth, giuing him thankes for his labours, [Page 387] desiring the application of his merits, stirring vp our selues A to the imitation of his vertues: The like reason mooueth vs to pray in the number of sixtie three Angelicall saluta­tions, to call to mind the yeeres the Mother of God liued on earth, according to one probable opinion.

And because the opinion that she liued seuentie two yeeres, now begins to be much followed, many Catholickes therupon (particularly in Spaine) haue thereupon increased the Corone of our Ladie, to seuentie two Aue-Marias; a B manifest signe, that they neuer attributed merit vnto the number of sixtie three, but onely to the deuout memories of the blessed Virgins vertues, exercised in the yeeres shee conuersed in this world, giuing to God thankes for his great graces bestowed on her. The Psalter of our Ladie, and the Iesus Psalter, containe one hundred and fiftie re­petitions of Prayers, the one of Aue-Marias, the other of Iesu, Iesu, Iesu, in imitation of the deuout Royall Pro­phet, C whose Psalter containes Psalmes in Gods praise, to the samè number.

ANSVVER.

The true Catholicke Church (which the Roman is not) maketh no Prayer meritorious in condignitie: for what can be imagined more absurd, than to maintaine that beggers doe me­rit, by crauing, and receiuing almes? And the number of Pa­ter D Nosters, Aues, and Creeds, which moderne Romists pre­scribe, is a nouell Inuention, and was of small esteeme vntill the dayes of Friar Dominicus Suar. d. Orat. lib. 3. cap. 9. n. 12. Mulci credunt incaepisse à B. Dominico, per diuinam Reuelationem (quod est pium & probabile, & non pa­rum antiquum, &c..

It was expected, that the Iesuit would haue confirmed his Romish deuotion, by the Testimonie of antiquitie, and by the practise of Apostolicall Churches, in the best ages thereof: But in place hereof hee reciteth onely, what the practise of the moderne Romists is, in repeating Pater Nosters, Aues, and E [...], to the number of three, fiue, and thirtie three, sixtie three, seuentie two, &c. But these deuices are voluntarie, and grounded vpon vncertaine causes: for what connexion is there betweene the Antecedent, to wit, the fiue wounds of Christ, [Page 388] and sixtie three, or seuentie two yeeres of the blessed Virgins A Temporall life, and the deuotion inferred and proportioned? because Christ had fiue wounds, and the Virgin Marie liued seuentie two yeeres in the world, therefore it is a seruice plea­sing God, and such a meanes to honour the blessed Virgin, as God accepteth for satisfaction, merit, and impetration.

There appeareth small difference betweene the former practise, and that which some Romane Casuists censure as su­perstitious, to wit, to place vertue, and to ascribe effects, to the precise number of words [...]. En­chir. cap. 11. n. 24. Superfluus cultus est, &c. audiendi sacrum à Presbytero qui vocatur Iohannes, vel dicendi bis Halleluja, vel Pater noster, &c. quando semel tantum dicendum est. and syllables, when the same is not appointed by God. B

IESVIT.

Neither are we in this point of repeating Prayers vpon Beades or little stones, in a certaine number, for the causes before mentioned, destitute of the example of Saints that liued in the best ages of the Church. Palladius in his Hi­storie, C Pallad. Hist. Lau­fiac. c. 24. 25. setteth downe some examples of Saints praying in this kinde: yea, the Centurie Writers and Osiander ac­knowledge Cent. 4. Col. 1329. Osiand. in Epitom. Cent. 4. p. 454. Sosomen Hist. lib. 6. cap. 29. the example of Saint Paul, a most holy Monke, liuing in the fourth age after Christ, that In dies singulos trecentas orationes Deo velut tributum reddidit, [...] ne per imprudentiam in numero erraret trecentis la­pillis in sinum coniectis, ad singulas preces singulos eijcit lapillos, consumptis igitur lapillis constabat sibi orationes lapillis numero pares abs se expletas D esse: Which example of so great a Saint, so knowne, and notorious, and neuer censured by any Father, may more than abundantly suffice for satisfaction in a matter of no more moment than this: for wee are not curious in this point, nor doe require of any man that he say his Prayers in a certaine number, so as that he may not say more or lesse, as his deuotion serues him.

ANSVVER. E

Palladius his writings are of small credit, and this Authour was long agoe censured by the Antient Hieron. Epist. ad Ctesiphon. c. Pelag. Idem. Epist. 60. Posseuin. Appar. Sac. verb. Palladius.. Paulus the Monke [Page 389] in Sosomene made three hundred Prayers to God Sosom. Hist. Ec­cles. lib. 6. c. 29. In precibus ad solum se defixit, & in dies singulos trecentas orationes Deo ve­lut Tributum quod­dam reddidit., but not any A to the blessed Virgin; and his vsing of stones when he said his Prayers, is an onely example, not paralelled in Antiquitie. But singular examples are no rule, neither doe they alwayes prooue the thing done, to be lawfull: for Batheus Ibid. c. 34. Ba­thaeus tanta vsus est cōtinentia tan­taque inaedia, vt vermes ex eius dentibus serperent. a Monke, in the same Historie, vsed such abstinence, that wormes bred in his teeth. Pior Ibid. c. 29. Pior cum statuisset ab ineunte adolescen­tia, vitae monasticae se consecrare eo ip­so temporis vesti­gio, quo ea de causa paternis aedibus egressus sit, spopondit Deo se de [...] neminem ex suis aliquando oculis aspecturum. Post annos 50. soror, &c. Vbi vero fores crepare sensit, oculis occlusis, &c. another Monke refused, after fiftie yeres absence, to looke vpon his naturall sister. Ammonius Ibid. c. 30. Cum à quibusdam comprehensus, Episcopus crearetur, quoniam illis qui ad se ea de re venerant precibus persuadere non poterat vt abirent, praecisa auricula dixit, &c. Se obstrinxit iureiurando si vim ei afferre [...], linguam quoque excisurum. being sollicited to bee a Bishop, cut off his owne eare, to make himselfe vncapable. These and the like examples, are not censured by the Historian B reporting them, and yet it is more than probable, that it is not safe for others to imitate them. In like sort, Paulus his beades are a matter of singularitie, rehearsed by Sozomene, rather for noueltie than for imitation.

Romists also, haue yet a farther slight in their Checkstone trickes of beades, forsooth, to blesse and sanctifie them, by the C touch of Relickes, or by the Popes benediction, that such trash may be sold the dearer by their pettie Chapmen.

THE SIXT POINT. THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSVBSTANTIATION.

IESVIT.

YOur Excellent Maiestie sub­mitting your Iudgement vnto Gods C expresse word, doth firmely beleeue the body of Christ, to be truely pre­sent in the most venerable Sacrament of the Altar, which Doctrine doth naturally and necessarily infer whatsoeuer the Church of Rome holds as matter of Faith, concerning the manner of his presence.

ANSVVER. D

HIs Sacred Maiestie (a true de­fendour of the antient Catholicke, and Apostolicke Faith, to his immortall praise) submitteth his iudgement in this, and in all other articles, to the expresse word of God, reuealed from Heauen by the holy Ghost, and externally prea­ched and penned by the Prophets and Apostles Hilar. ad Con­stant. Aug. Fidem Imperator quaeris, audi eam non de nouis Chartulis, sed de Dei [...].. And con­cerning E the sacred Eucharist, he firmely beleeueth, that in the holy vse thereof, the verie Bodie and Bloud of Christ are truely, really, and effectually presented and communicated to all faithfull and worthie Receiuers.

[Page 391] But that the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation, to wit, A that after consecration, the substance of bread and wine is abo­lished, and the shapes, accidents, and quantitie thereof onely remaine; or that the Bodie and Bloud of Christ are inclosed substantially and corporally vnder the accidentall formes, be­fore participation; or that dogs and swine truely eat the flesh, and drinke the bloud of the sonne of man Aug. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 21. cap. 25. Qui mancucat car­nem meam, & bi­bet sanguinem me­um in me manet, & B ego in eo: oftendit quid sit, non Sacramento tenus, sed reuerà corpus Christi manducare, & eius sanguinem bibere, hoc est enim in Christo manere vt in illo maneat & Christus. Prosp. sent. Aug. 339. Escam vitae accipit, & aeternitatis poculum bibit, qui in Christo manet, & cuius Christus habitator est. Nam qui discordat à Christo, nec carnem eius manducat, nec sanguinem bibit: etiàm si tantae rei Sacramentum, ad iudicium suae prae [...] quotidiè indifferentèr accipiat. Origen. in Math. cap. 15. Si fieri possit vt qui malus adhuc perseueret [...] ver­bum factum carnem, cùm sit verbum & panis viuus, nequaquam scriptum fuisset, Quisquis ederit panem hunc, viuet in aeternum. Hilarius, d. Trinit. lib. 8. Haec accepta atquè hausta, id efficiunt, vt & nos in Christo, & Christus in nobis sit., he cannot beleeue vntill demonstration be made, that this Faith is taught by Gods expresse word, and was antiently beleeued by the true Catho­lique Church.

IESVIT.

To declare this, and together answer an obiection much C vrged by some Protestants, That they beleeue the bodie of Christ to be in the Sacrament, but say, they are not bound to beleeue the manner, that, not being expressed in Scripture.

ANSWER.

When the substance of a point is reuealed, and the distinct and particular manner concealed, it is sufficient to beleeue the former, without searching into the latter. And not only some Protestants, but the Fathers also, and some learned Pontifici­ans, D deliuer thus much concerning the sacred Eucharist.

Bandinus Bandinus, sent­d. Sacr. pa. 367. Sed siuè sic, siuè alitèr sit, tenendum est quod Aug. ait. Si quaerismodum quo id fieri possit, [...] dico: My­sterium Fidei salu­britèr credi potest, [...] potest., and the master of the Sentences Lombard. Sent. 4. Dist. 11. Si autem quaeritur qualis sit illa conuersio, an [...], an sub­stantialis, vel alterius generis? definite non sufficio. Tonstal. d. Euchar. lib. 1. pag. 46. De modo quo id fieret, satius E erat curiosum quenquè relinquere [...] coniecturae, sicut liberum fuit ante Concilium [...]., say, Touching the manner of conuersion (in the Sacrament) some affirme one way, and some another, &c. We say with S. Augustine, This mysterie is safely beleeued, but not with safetie searched into. Cyrill Cyril. in Iohan. li. 4. ca. [...] Firmam fidem mysterijs adhibentes, nunquam in tàm sublimibus rebus, illud quomodo aut [...], aut proferamus. Ibid. ca. 24. Quomodo id fiat, nec mente intelligere, nec lingua dicere possumus, sed silentio & firma fide id suscipimus. Bernard. Epist. 77. Sacramentum Dei altissimi suscipiendum est, non ratione discutiendum, venerandum & admirandum non dijudicandum, aut ad rationis vel sapientiae humanae calculum reuocandum, &c. of Alex­andria, We ought firmely to beleeue the holy mysterie, but let vs neuer in matters thus sublime, so much as imagine, to vtter the manner how. And againe, The manner how this is done, can neither be conceiued [Page 392] by the mind, nor expressed by the tongue. Theophilact. Theoph. in Ioh. 6. Quando cogita­tiones incredulita­tis ingrediuntur in animam, ingreditur simul quo modo, &c. Oportet igitur nos quum audiuerimus, nisi ederitis carnem filij, non habebitis vitam, in sumptionibus diui­norum mysteriorum, indubitatam retinere fidem, & non quaerere quo pacto. [...]. Papa. Myst. [...]. li. 4. c. 16. Si queratur vtrum Christus localitèr [...] de Coelo, [...] in Coelum, quum [...] aut subtrahit praesentiam corporalem, an aliter incipiat, vel desinat esse sub specie [...]. [...]. non [...] nos in ta­libus curiosos existere, ne plus quam possumus, praesumamus, & non comprehendamus. Salubre [...] Apostolus, Noli plus sapere quam oportet sapere, sed sapere ad sobrietaté. Ego nescio quomodo Christus accedit, sed & quomodo recedit ignoro, nouit ille qui nihil ignorat. When we A heare these words of Christ, vnlesse yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man, &c. Wee ought firmely to beleeue the same, and not enquire after what manner. And with these agreeth Caluin Cal. Com. Eph. 5. v. 32. Cum nobis in sacra Caena carné & fanguiné Christi exhiberi negant, modum inquiunt definias aut non persuadebis. At qui ego [...] alti­tudine in stuporé abripeor: nequè verò me pudet, admiratione meá igncrantiá [...] Paulo fateri. Quanto enim B id satius, quam extenuare carnis meae sensu, quod paulus altum mysterium esse pronunciat? Idquè docetipsa ratio. Quicquid enim supernaturale est, id [...] captum ingenij nostri superat. Proindè [...] vt Christum sentiamus potius in nobis viuentem, quam vt communicationis ratio nobis pateat. sup. Ephes. 5.32.

IESVIT.

We must note that men are bound firmely to beleeue the manner of a mysterie reuealed, when the same belongs to the substance thereof, so that reiecting the manner, we reiect the beleefe of the substance of the mysterie. This is C euident, and may be declared by the example of the my­sterie of the Incarnation, the substance whereof is, That in Christ Iesus, the nature of God, and the nature of man are so vnited, that God is truely man, and man is verily God. The manner of this mysterie is ineffable and incom­prehensible: yet we are bound to beleeue three things con­cerning it, which if we denie, we deny the mysterie in sub­stance, howsoeuer we may retaine the same in words. First, that this vnion is not onely metaphoricall by affection, as D two persons that are great friends, may truely be said to be all one, but Non affectualis vnitas sed secundū subsistentiam Sy­nodus 5. general. Can. 4. also true and reall. Secondly, this reall vni­on of Natures is substantiall Qui non có­fitetur Dei verbum substantialitèr vni­ri carni Anathema sit. Synod. Chalced. Act. 5. Synod. 5. general. Can. 5., and not accidentall, so that thereby the nature of man is not only accidentally per­fected, by receiuing excellent participations of the diuine nature, power, wisdome, and maiestie, but also substantially the verie fulnesse of the Godhead, dwelling corporally and substantially in him. Thirdly, this substantiall Con. Latera­nense sub Martino. 1. Can. 6. vnion E is not according to the Natures, so that the nature of God, and the nature of man become one, and the same nature (as Eutiches taught) but hypostaticall, whereby God and [Page 393] man became one and the same person. These particulars A about the manner of the Incarnation, though high and sub­tile, and imcomprehensible to reason, Christians may, and must beleeue, because they belong to the substance of the mysterie, and are declared by the Church in generall Coun­cells, though the vulgar be not bound explicitly to know them.

ANSWER. B

When the distinct and speciall manner is reuealed, and be­longeth to the forme and being of an Article, we are obliged to inquire, and firmely to beleeue the same, according to the instance giuen about the personall vnion: But when the same is not distinctly and plainely reuealed, nor of the substance of the mysterie, it is more safe, according to the holy Scripture, and Fathers Ambr. [...] li. 6. c. 2. Origen. Le­uit. hom. 5. Chrys. 1. Cor. hom. 17. Greg. Mor. li. 20. c. 8. Ter­tul. d. Anima, ca. 1. Hefich. in Leuit. 6., to be ignorant of that which is abstruse and hid­den, than to be curious beyond our modell, Exod. 19. 17. Pro. 25.27. Act. 1.7. Rom. 12.3. 1. Cor. 4.6. Col. 2.18. Touching things inscrutable, S. Chrysostome saith Chrys. in Math. Hom. 76., [...], C it is better to be soberly ignorant, than naughtily intel­ligent. S. Hierom Hier. ad Eu­stoch., Melius est aliquid nescire securè, quam cum pe­riculo discere, it is better to be ignorant of some things with safe­tie [...] to seeke to learne them with perill. S. Augustine Aug. d. ver. Ap. ser. 7., Me­lior est fidelis ignorantia, quam temeraria scientia: and Iustine Mar­tyr Iust. Expos. fid., It is the part of euerie prudent and pious man, in matters di­uine, sometimes to giue the wall (to that which exceedeth his mo­dell.) S. Athanasius Athan. ad Se­rap., [...]. The ve­rie Cherubims vaile their faces when it is come thus farre. Sal­uianus li. 3. d. Prouid. in like manner saith, Sacriligae temeritatis quoddam ge­nus D est, si plus scire cupias quam sinaris, It is sacrilegious temeri­tie to couet to know that which thou art not permitted.

But the questions of Theologie, which are de modo, concer­ning the distinct manner, in many cases want sufficient grounds in diuine Reuelation, to vnfold them; and therefore in things of this nature, humble scilence is more safe than temerarious definition.

IESVIT. E

Jn this sort we say, That the manner how our Saui­ours bodie is in the Sacrament of his last supper, must be beleeued, and may not be denied as farre as it concernes the verie life, being, and substance of the mysterie reuealed: [Page 394] which mysterie in substance is, That the Bodie of Christ is A present in the Sacrament, in such sort, that the Priest, Mini­ster thereof, demonstrating what seemeth bread, may truely say thereof in the person of Christ, This is my Bodie. This supposed as the substance of the Mysterie, I inferre, that two Catholicke Doctrines concerning the manner of this Myste­rie, belong to the substance of this Mysterie, and cannot be called in question without danger of misbeleefe. First, the Reall presence of the whole Bodie of Christ, vnder the B formes of bread: Secondly, that this is done by Transub­stantiation.

ANSWER.

Whatsoeuer is certainely reuealed in holy Scripture, concer­ning the manner of Christs Presence in the Sacrament, must be beleeued, and not denied: and so much is reuealed, as is suffici­ent to inable the Minister & people to vnderstand by Faith, that Christs word and promise, saying, This is my bodie, are infalliblie C true, and alwayes fulfilled, when his Ordinance is obserued. But Christ affirmeth not, that the shapes of bread and wine are his Bodie and Blood, neither that he is present by carnall vnion of his naturall Bodie and Blood, with the formes or accidents of the Elements; or that his Bodie and Blood are present in the holy Eucharist, by Transubstantiation.

IESVIT. §. 1. D That the Reall presence of the whole Bodie of Christ, vnder the formes of Bread, belongs to the substance of the Mysterie.

TO prooue this, I suppose as certaine, that the Bodie Praesentiam credi­mus non minus quam vos veram haec fides Regis o­pera regia. Resp. ad Card. Pe­ron. p. 399.400. of Christ is truely and really in the Sacrament of his Supper. This I may iustly suppose, seeing your Maie­stie doth professe to hold a presence of the Body of Christ in E the Sacrament, no lesse true than we hold; and consequently, you will not vnderstand the words of Christ figuratiuely, as Sacramentaries doe; for they make the Body of Christ [Page 395] present in the Eucharisticall Bread, but as in a figure, hol­ding A not a true nor a reall presence, but onely a presence by imagination and conceit, as is euident.

ANSVVER.

Reall presence is taken two wayes. First, for a true and effe­ctuall presence, of the body and blood of Christ, so as man, re­ceiuing the externall signes by his naturall parts, receiueth also the thing signified and presented, by the action of his spiritu­all B facultie, to wit, by an operatiue faith Aug. in Ioh. tr. 26. Hoc est man­ducare illam es­cam, & illum bibere potum, in Christo manere, & illum manentem in se habere: Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, & in quo non manet Christus, procul dubio nec manducat spiritualiter carnem eius, nec bibit eius fan­guinem, licet carnaliter, & visibiliter premat dentibus Sacramentum corporis & sanguinis Christi: sed magis tantae [...] Sacramentum ad iuditium fibi manducat & bibit, quia immundus presumpsit ad Christi accedere Sacramenta, quae aliquis non digne sumit nisi qui mundus est. Caietan. Opusc. to. 2. tr. 2. d. Euchar. ca. 5. Man­ducatur verum Christi corpus in Sacramento, sed non corporaliter sed spiritualiter, Spiritualis manducatio, quae per animam fit ad Christi carnem in Sacramento existentem pertingit., Ioh. 6.51.53, 54, 55, 56, 57.

Secondly, for a corporall presence, when the thing signified C and presented, is according to the naturall substance thereof, contayned vnder the shapes of the outward signes Idem. Opuse. [...]. 2. tr. 2. d. Encha­rist. cap. 3. [...]. Cath. [...] car­nem Christi, non solum significari, sed contineri in hoc Sacramento., and toge­ther with them conueyed into the mouth, stomacke, and bodily parts.

His most excellent Maiestie and all his Orthodoxall people, beleeue reall presence according to the first acceptation, but the fame is denyed according to the latter acceptation.

The Iesuit being ignorant of this distinction, or else dissem­bling D the same, disputeth as followeth:

They which hold a reall presence of Christs body no lesse true than Papists themselues hold, cannot vnderstand the words of Christ, This is my body, &c. figuratiuely.

But his Maiestie holdeth a reall presence of Christs body, no lesse true than Papists themselues hold, Ergo E

His Maiestie cannot vnderstand the words of Christ, This is my body figuratiuely.

I answer. The Maior of the former argument is denyed: for a true reall and effectuall presence of Christs body and blood, [Page 396] may bee taught and deliuered by a figuratiue Vasques. in 3. p. Tho. to. [...]. disp. 180. cap. 5. n. 51. Supponendū im­primis est, in Scrip­tura non solum inueniri verb a vera in proprio sensu, & non figurato veram etiam non raro in solo figurato & metaphorico, &c. Rupert. in Ioh. li. 6. pag. 131. figuratio locutionis, veritatem rei non perimit, quemadmodum in parabola seminantis, verba parabolica, rem non [...], vere seminantis. speech: for, A First, the mysticall head, is really, truely, and effectually pre­sent to the mysticall body; and yet notwithstanding, this pre­sence is taught in holy Scripture, by figuratiue words: Read Psal. 45. Salomons song. Eph. 5. Ioh. 15.

Secondly, one part of our Sauiours words about the Sacra­ment (to wit, This cup is the new Testament in my blood, Luc. 22.20.) B is figuratiue, by confession of Romists themselues Bellar. d. Eu­charistia li. 1. cap. 11. Non negamus. In verbo Calix tro­pum esse. Tho. Aqui. pa. 3. q. 78. ar. 3. ad 1. Cum dicitur hic est Calix sanguinis mei est locutio figu­rata. Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. nu. 4. ar. 2. §. 4. Nugnus. Sup. 3. Tho. q. 78. ar. 3. Coninck. d. Sacram. q. 75. ar. 1. nu. 38. pa. 194. Petigian. 4. d. 10. q. 1. ar. 1. ad 2. arg. Non excludimus omnes figuratas & improprias lo­cutiones, a forma huius Sacramenti, nam aliquot, sunt fine dubio admittendae. Ruard. ar. 13. Non oportet hic excludere quemlibet tropum, nam consecratio Calicis necessario aliquem requirit., and yet they hold the thing expressed and meant by those words, to be really giuen. It is false therefore, which the Iesuit and his consorts affirme, That Protestants expounding the words of Christ ( This is my body) figuratiuely, doe by this sence ouer­throw the true presence of Christs body and bloud in the holy Eucharist, and bring in onely a fantasticall and imaginarie pre­sence: for a mysticall Presence, wrought by the power of the holy Ghost, is as reall, and true a presence Theod. Beza. c. Claud. d. Xaints. Apol. [...]. Scito a nobis spiritualem preceptionem dici, non quae sit imaginaria, non quae cogitatione tan­tum fiat, cui veritas non subsit: sed cuius sit organon, Dei quidem respectu, vis illa diuini spiritus nobis plane inenarrabilis: nostra vero ex parte, animus noster, vera fide in oblatum fibi obiectum, Christum [...] nostrum intueus, vt eum multo verius, certius, efficacius comprehendant, quam vel ipsa Symbola cernant ocu­li, tangant manus, lingua degustet, vel promissionis verba aures exaudiant. Itaque prorsus ridiculum te pro­bas, qui haec duo, vere, & spiritualiter, inter se opponis, cum in rem minime fictam fides nostra feratur, & spiri­tu sancto duce praeeunte, falli spiritus noster non potest. in one kind, as a corporall and carnall presence is in another kind. C

But the Romists themselues are the men, which contending D for their carnall Presence, giue vs a fantasticall body of Christ, in stead of a true and naturall body; and Phantasticall Elements, to wit, Accidents, and emptie shadowes of Elements, in stead of the substantiall creatures of Bread and Wine, by this absurd doctrine vtterly subuerting the holy Sacrament.

IESVIT.

Wherein, as your Maiestie knowes, they contradict the Euthim. Panop. p. 2. Tit. 22. Theop. in Marc. c. 14. [...]. Orthod. Fid. li. 4. ca. 14. Anastasi­us Sanaita. Gaudent. Tract. 2. in Exod. Chrys. in ca. 26. Math Hom. 83. De ijs qui myst. initiant. ca. 9. Epiphan. in Anchorat. Hilar. li. 8. d. Trinit. Cyril. Hierosol. Catechis. 4. antient Church, which teacheth expresly, That Christ did E not say, this is a figure of my body, but, this is my body; and [Page 397] exhorts vs to beleeue Christ on his word, he said, This is my A body; I pray you let vs beleeue him whom we haue belee­ued, veritie cannot vtter vntruth, and herein acknow­ledge with your Maiestie, a most high and incomprehensible Mysterie, which were no Mysterie at all, the words being vnderstood in a meere figuratiue sence.

ANSWER.

The question is not, Whether Christ vttered these words or B not, This is my body, This cup is the new Testament in my bloud. Neither is there any doubt of the veritie of our Sauiours speech, or whether we must beleeue his word or not (to which purpose Gaudentius Gaudent. Trac. 2. Sup. Exod. Cre­damus cui credi­mus, nescit men­dacium veritas. speaketh;) but the question is, concerning the sence of the words, to wit, whether, This is my body, This cup is the new Testament in my blood, are to be expounded literally? Arguments for the negatiue part, are these which follow:

First, if the substance of Bread and Wine be deliuered in the Eucharist, our Aduersarie will grant Read. the next Section, with­out granting Tran­substantiation the words of Christ can­not be true, taken in the literall sence, &c. Richard. 4. d. 11. in fine ar. 4. q. 6. Explic. Substantia panis nunquam est corpus Christi, quamuis conuerta­tur in ipsum., that the words are figu­ratiue, because one indiuiduall substance, cannot be predicated C of another, properly. But it shall be prooued in the sections fol­lowing, both out of Scripture, and Fathers, that the substance of Bread and Wine, are deliuered in the holy Eucharist.

Secondly, the words whereby the wine is consecrated, Luc. 22.20. are tropicall, by the confession of our Aduersaries. Read. before pag. 396. Turrecre­mat. Sup. Decret. 3. pars. d. consecrat. Dist. 2. c. Panis in altari. Cum dicitur hic est Calix sanguinis mei est locutio figuratiua, & potest dupliciter in­telligi, vno modo secundum Metonymian, quia ponitur continens pro contento, vt sit sensus, Hic sanguis me­us D in Calice de quo fit hic mentio, quia sanguis Christi in hoc Sacramento consectatur in quantum est potus fidelium, quod non importatur in ratione sanguinis, & ideo oportuit hic designari per vas huic vsui accom­modatum: alio modo potest intelligi secundum Metaphoram, secundum quod, per Calicem intelligitur simi­litudinarie, passio Christi, quae ad fimilitudinē Calicis, inebriat & sua amaritudine quasi hominē extra se ponit.

Thirdly, if the words be taken properly, then the body of Christ, and the bloud of Christ, are deliuered, and receiued, without the soule and deitie of Christ, for in proprietie of speech, the body is a distinct, and diuers thing, from the soule, and likewise the blood.

Fourthly, that which Christ deliuered to bee eaten and drunke, by his Disciples, he did sacramentally eate and drinke E himselfe, Luc. 22.15. as S. Hierome Hieron. ad He­dib q. 2. Euthym. in Mat. 26. cap. 64. Chrys. in Mat. Hom. 83., S. Chrysostome, Euthymius, with many Schoole-men Aquin. 3. q. [...] ar. 1. Suar. in 3. Th. q. 81 ar. 1. Com. Nugnus. ibid. Potrecta. Sup. Math. 26. Conclus. 3. Corrolar. 3. Vasques in 3, Disp. 216. n. 81. Conclusio est affirmans, in qua omnes Catholici quos ego legerim plane conueniunt. affirme. But if the words be litteral­ly [Page 398] vnderstood, then he did eat his owne body, and drinke his A owne blood.

Fiftly, if the words be vnderstood literally, then Christ gaue his passible and mortall body Aquin. 3. q. 81. ar. 3. Nec ipsu cor­pus Christi quod in specie Sacra­menti dabatur, im­passibile erat. Nug­nus in 3. p Th. ibid. Corpus exhibitum Apostolis, & sumptum ab ipso Christo Domino, vere erat passibile. Bellarm. d. Euchar. li. 1. ca. 14. to the Disciples: but I trow, no Iesuit will maintaine that a body mortall and passible can be in many Hosts, or mouths at once; neither can the same be corpo­rally eaten, without sensible touching and feeling thereof, or diuiding one part thereof from another.

Sixtly, if our Sauiours words be literally expounded; then B Infidells, dogges, and swine, may Turrecremat. Sup. Decre. d. Con­secrat. dist. 2. ca. Qui bene. Verum corpus Christi, ma­net adhuc sub spe­ciebus, à brutis seu brutorum ore acceptis, & in ventrem traiectis, quamdiu species illae manent, hoc est quamdiu substantia panis maneret ficut etiam si proijccretur in Lutum. eate the flesh, and drinke the bloud of the Sonne of man: but all that eate the flesh, and drinke the bloud of the Sonne of man, haue euerlasting life, Ioh. 6.49.50, 51.54.56.

Seauenthly, if our Sauiours words were literall, regular, and C plaine (as Papists pretend) then they themselues could not bee distracted, and diuided about the sence thereof. But they are notoriously diuided Iustinian. Com. 1. Cor. 11. v. 24. In­gens est, non solum inter Haereticos, sed etiam Catholicos, de horum verborum sensu, controuersia. Vasques in 3. Tho. to. 3. disp. 101. n. 1. Circa pro nomina, non solum Haeretici, varie dogmatizant, verum etiam [...], in tanta opinionum varie tate sunt constituti, vt singulatim eas recensere nimis molestum esset Suares. in 3. p. Tho. q. 77. ar. 2. disp. 58. Sect. 8. Vasq. ibid. to. 3. disp. 181. ca. 1. nu. 1..

First, Some of them say, that the Pronoune (This) signifieth nothing [...]. Sup. Decret. d. Consecr. Dist. 2. ca panis in Altari. Resp. quod circa hoc multi­plex fuit opinio, Quidam n. dixe­runt, quod in hac locutione, hoc est corpus meum haec dictio (hoc) nullam demonstrationem facit. Fauent. in 4. Sent. Dist. 8. q. 2. Disp. 34. Citat pro hac opinione Jnnocent. d. Myster. Miss. li. 4. cap. 17. Durand. in 4. D. 8. q. 2. Ad. 1. Gabr. in Can. Miss. lect. 48.. Others say it signifies the Bread Godfied. Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. m. 4. ar. 2. §. 3. Bo­navent. E 4. d. 8. ar. 1. Pronomen demonstrat, panis substantiam, sub Accidentibus quae oculis conspici po­test.. Alex. Hales. Hocest cor­pus D meum: sensus est, signatum hoc signo, quod est panis transubstantian­dus in corpus meum, est corpus meum, that is, The sence of these words, This is my body, is, the Bread presently to bee transub­stantiate, into my body, is my body. Some say it signifieth the Accidents, and formes of Bread: others, it signifieth the body of Christ. Some say, it signifieth confusedly, that which is contay­ned vnder the formes. And euery of these opinions, hath sundry crookes, windings, and limitations Read. Suares in 3. p. Tho. Disp. 58. Sect. 6. Henriq. Sum. d. Euchar. li. 8. ca. 19. Coninck. d. Sa­eram. q. 78. ar. 5. num 41. Ruard. ar. 13. Caietan. Opuse. to 2. tr. 2. d. Euchar. c. 7. Indiuiduum substantiae abs­que determinatione naturae tam panis quam Corporis Christi..

[Page 399] Secondly, Touching the Verbe substantiue, est (is) some ex­pound A it by continetur Aquin. 3. q. 75. ar. 8. & q. 78. ar. 2. & 5. Bellarm. re­fert d. Euchar. lib. 1. cap. 11. & Ar­gentin. 4. d. 8. ar. 2., vnder these formes, my bodie is con­tained. Others expound it by Erit Ibid. 4. d. 8. ar. 2., This shall be my bodie, when the sentence is ended. Some say it signifieth Transmuta­tur Richard. 4. d. 8. ar. 3. ad. 7. Marsilius 4. q. 6. ar. 1. Bonauent. 4. d. 8. ar. 1. q. 1. Gabr. in Can. Miss. Lect. 48., It is changed and conuerted.

Thirdly, Touching the words Corpus meum (my Bodie) Some say it is Materia prima, The first matter of Christs Bodie. O­thers, B The materiate Bodie with the reasonable soule. Others, A Bodie organicall, without reference, to being a liuing Bodie, or a dead. Others, A liuing Bodie. Some say it is a Bodie with­out quantitie, dimensions, or parts Durand, 4. Dist. 10. q. 2.. Others, A Bodie, hauing quantitie, without extension, figure, & order of parts Occham. 4. Dist. 10. q. 4.. Others, A bodie hauing quantitie, without extrinsecall reference to place Bellarm. d. Eu­char. lib. 3. cap. 4. & l. 1. c. 2. & 14., an immateriall Bodie, like vnto Angels and Spirits Ibid. lib. 1. ca. 2. & cap. 14. [...]. Opusc. to. 2. tr. 2. c. 5., C and they resemble the same by the Image of mans face reflecting in a glasse Thyreus d. Appar. Sacram. Petigian. 4. d. 10. ar. 4. Viguerius. Instit. c. 16. v. 7.: A Bodie hauing the stature of a man, and yet contai­ned in euerie crumme of bread Suar. in. 3. p. Tho. Disp. 52. Sect. 3. Capreolus 4. Dist. 10. q. 4. ar. 3. Petig. 4. d. 10. q. 1. [...]. 4. dub. 1. Aquin. 3. q. 76. ar. 2.3. Soto 4. d. 10. q. 1. ar. 2.3. [...]. Ab [...]. Dial. 4. §. 244. Victoria d. [...]. n. 64. Viuald. d. Euchar. c. 7. n. 15. Vasques 3. disp. 88. c. 3. Greg. Val. to 4. disp. 6. q. 4. punct. 2. Bonacin. d. Sacram. d. Euchar. disp. 4. q. 3. punct. 5. prop. 3. Christus quoad sub­stantiam & accidentia, non solum existit sub qualibet specie, verum etiam sub qualibet parte specierum..

Thus whiles Romists denie, that there is a figure in our Sa­uiours words, they fall into innumerable absurdities, & in stead of the true and perfect bodie of Christ, crucified for vs, and communicated in the holy Eucharist, they reach vs a fantasti­call bodie, and a very vaine shadow, and Image of Christs re­all D bodie.

But the Aduersarie, to make the contrarie Tenet appeare Catholicke, affirmeth, That the antient Church expresly de­nied our Sauiours words to be figuratiue, and in his Margen he pointeth out certaine Authours, Euthymius, Theophilact, Damas­cene, &c. I answere, although these Authours (being none of them antient, but post nati) affirme, that Christ in the holy Eu­charist deliuereth, not onely a figure of his bodie, but his true bodie, (which is also our Tenet) yet they say not, that there is no E trope or figure in our Sauiours words. Theophylacts Theoph. sup. Marc. c. 14. words are, Non tantum figura & exemplar est corporis Christi, &c. It is not onely a figure or similitude of Christs bodie. Euthy­mius Euthim. sup. Math. 26. cap. 64. [...] vidit Iesaias: carbo autem non simpliciter lignum, sed lignum ignitum., Esaias beheld a fierie coale, the coale was not simply or onely [Page 400] wood, but fierie wood, such is this fierie coale in this great Mysterie. A

Secondly, It is to be obserued, that these Authours, tea­ching that bread and wine are Sacramentally or mystically conuerted, doe also maintaine, that the said Elements remaine in their materiall substance Chrys. ad Cae­sar. Monach. Ante­quam sanctificetur panis, panem no­minamus, diuina autem illum sancti­ficante gratia, mediante [...] liberatus est, ab appellatione panis, dignus autem habitus est, dominici corpo­ris appellatione, Etsi Natura panis in ipso permansit. Euthim. in Math. 26. c. 64. Non corrum puntur [...], neque in secessum abscedunt, [...] in substantiam coassumuntur spiritualem eius qui [...]. Naturalis cibus est & po­tus B panis ac vini, quae proponuntur, supernaturalis vero efficax eorum operatio. [...]. Tract. 2. in Exod. cum panem consecrarum & vinum discipulis suis porrigeret sic ait hoc est corpus meum, &c., and that Christs bodie and blood are receiued into the spirituall powers of the soule; and they say Chrys. in Math. ho. 83. Reipsa nos corpus suum efficit. Theoph. in Ioh. c. 6. Qui manducat me viuit propter me, dum quodammodo miscetur mihi, & [...] in me, &c. Cyprian. d. caena. Dom. n. 18. Greg. [...]. Orat. Chat. 37. [...] [...]. farther, That Christ changeth the worthie Receiuers into his Bodie.

IESVIT.

As for some places of Fathers brought to the contra­rie, how they are to be vnderstood your Maiestie is not ig­norant: Aug. in Psal. 3. Aug. contra Adamant. cap. 12. Saint Augustine saying, That Christ gaue to his C Disciples a figure of his Bodie and Blood, spoke not of a bare emptie figure, but of the figure of a thing really pre­sent; as likewise in another place, when he saith, Christ af­firmed it was his Bodie, when he gaue a signe of his Bodie, though there he may seeme to speake in the opinion of the Manichees, who held, That Christ had not true flesh, but a meere figure, shape, and shaddow of flesh: against whom in that place, he vndertakes to prooue, That the figure of a D thing may bee tearmed the thing it selfe (Argumento ad hominem) that Christ said, This is my Bodie, when hee gaue but a figure of his Bodie, to wit, as you thinke. Ter­tullian hath this speech, Christ taking bread into his hands, and distributing it to his Disciples, made the same his Body, saying, Hoc est corpus meum, id est, figura corporis mei; where, figura corporis mei, is referred, not vnto corpus meum, as an explication thereof, but E vnto hoc, in this maner, hoc id est figura corporis mei, est corpus meum. This to bee Tertullians meaning, ap­peares Tertul. l. 4. Contra Marcionem. by the drift of his discourse in that place; for Ter­tullian [Page 401] is to shew, that whereas in the Old Testament A Bread was afigure of the Bodie of Christ, as appeares by the words of the Prophet, Mittamus lignum in panem eius, id est crucem in corpus eius: Christ in the New Testa­ment, made this figure to be truely and really his Bodie, ta­king Bread into his hands, saying this, that is, This figure of my Bodie is my Bodie, as if he said, Bread (which anti­ently was a figure of my Bodie) I doe now make to be true­ly and really my Bodie; and this is an vsuall phrase in Ter­tullian, B Tertull. Contra Prax. c. 29. who not to interrupt the sentence of holy Scrip­ture, addeth his explication of the subiect (not presently, but) after the Attribute, as when he said, Christus mor­tuus est, id est, vnctus, the sence whereof is, Christus, id est, vnctus mortuus est.

ANSWER.

Many of the Fathers Chrysost. in Math. Hom. 83. & in Epist. Heb. Hom. 17. Gelasius c. Eu­tich. Theod. Dial. 2. Dionis. Hierarch. cap. 3. Gregor. Nazian. Apolog. Macar. Hom. 27. Ambros. Offic. lib. 1. cap. 48. Hieron. sup. Math. 26. de Consecrat. Dist. 2. c. Accipite. Dio­nis. Hierarch. c. 2. & 3. Aug. lib. 83. q. 61., treating of the Sacramentall signes, C call them Figures, Representations, Similitudes, Memorials, Anti­tipes, &c. of the Bodie and Blood of Christ. But that which is a figure, similitude, and representation of a thing, is not proper­ly the same. Saint Augustine August. de Doctr. Christ. lib. 3. cap. 16. Figura est precipiens passioni Domini esse com­municandum, & suauiter atque vti­liter recondendum in memoria quod caro eius pro no­bis crucifixa & vul­nerata sit., It is a figuratiue speech, comman­ding vs to be partakers of the Lords Passion, and sweetly and profita­bly to keepe in minde, that his flesh was crucified, and wounded for vs. The Lord did not sticke to say, This is my bodie, when hee gaue the signe of his bodie August. in Psal. 98.. Origen Orig. in cap. 15. Math., This I speake of the typi­call, and figuratiue bodie. Saint Ambrose Ambros. d. Sacram. lib. 4. cap. 5., Which is the figure of the bodie and blood of the Lord Iesus. Saint Chrysostome [...]. Imperf. Math. Hom. 11., D In the sanctified vessell, there is not the true bodie of Christ, but a mysterie of his bodie is there contained. Gratians Glosse Gratian. d. Consecrat. Dist. 2. §. Hoc est Prosper., The Diuine bread, which representeth the flesh of Christ, is called, The bo­die of Christ, but improperly. Beda Beda in [...]. 22., Substituting his flesh and blood, in the figure of bread and wine. Druthmarus Druthmar. sup. Math. c. 26., The blood of Christ is aptly figured thereby. Bertram Bertram. l. d. corp. & sang. Dom. Paschas. [...]. Sacram. Corp. Dom. cap. 12., Bread and Wine, is figuratiuely the Bodie and Blood of Christ. And Tertullian more antient than any of these, saith, That Bread representeth the Bodie of Christ Tertul. c. Marc, l. 1. c. 14.: And he saith in two places Ibid. l. 3. c. 19. & l. 4. c. 40., That it is a figure E of Christs Bodie.

[Page 402] The Iesuit in his answer to these plaine testimonies, taketh A notice onely of S. Augustine, and Tertullian: and concerning the first, he saith, that S. Augustine spake not of a bare and emp­tie figure, but of the figure of a thing really present: but this answere is deceitfull, for the Sacramentall elements are a true and liuely figure, and not a bare and emptie signe of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ. And although the Bodie and Bloud of Christ are not essentially contained and inclosed in the shapes, or materiall substance of the elements, yet they are really com­municated by the holy Ghost, at and by the faithfull and wor­thie receiuing of these diuine mysteries. The second place of B S. Augustine admitteth not the Iesuits solution: for one diffe­rence betweene the Manichee, and this Father, was, concerning Moses his words, Deut. 12.23. Thou shalt not eat the Bloud, for the Bloud is the Soule. S. Augustine saith Aug. c. Adi­mant. c. 12., Possum interpretari prae­ceptum illud in signo esse positum, I may expound that comman­dement, by saying, it was set downe in a signe for Christ doub­ted not to affirme Non enim Dominus dubitauit dicere, Hoc est cor­pus meum cum sig­num daret corpo­ris sui., This is my bodie, when he gaue a signe of his Bodie. In these words S. Augustine teacheth, that as the Bloud is cal­led the Soule, after the manner of a signe, so likewise, the Bread in the holy Eucharist is called the bodie of Christ, because it is C a signe of his bodie. This similitude prooueth, that S. Augustine held our Sauiours words, This is my Bodie, to be a siguratiue enunciation, which is the thing affirmed by vs. Tertullian Tertul. c. Marc. li. 4. c. 40. Acceptum panē & distributū Discipulis, corpus suum illū fecit, hoc est corpus meū di­cendo, id est figura corporis mei, panē corpus suum appel­lat. affir­meth expressely of Bread, which he receiued into his hand, and distributed to his disciples, that it is a figure of Christs Bo­die. And the Aduersaries [...], expounding his words in this manner, The figure of my bodie is my bodie, is voluntarie, or rather sophisticall, for the words immediately following are, he called bread his Bodie, and in other places, he maketh bread the subiect of the proposition Idem. c. Marc. li. 1. c. 14. Nec panē quo ipsum corpus suum representat, li. 3. ca. 19. Deus in Euangelio reuela­uit panem corpus suum appellans. J­dem. c. Iud. c. 10., This is my Bodie. But the acci­dents D and shape of bread, are not bread: neither did our Sa­uiour, when he said, This is my Bodie, demonstrate the forme on­ly of Bread, or command the formes only of Bread and Wine to be corporally receiued; for he did demonstrate that which was sacramentally changed, but the accidents of Bread and Wine are not changed into Christs Bodie and Bloud, by the confession of Papists themselues.

IESVIT.

This supposed, I inferre that the bodie of Christ is pre­sent E in the mysticall Supper, not onely to the faithfull that receiue the Sacrament, nor onely to the place or Church where the holy Synaxis is celebrated, but vnder the formes [Page 403] of Bread in the verie same place therewith. This manner of A presence is cleerely consequent vpon the precedent, and that granted, this cannot be denyed. For the reason for which Christians hold the bodie of Christ to be really & truly pre­sent in the Sacrament, is, because they cannot otherwise in proper and plaine sence verifie the word of Christ, to say of Bread, this is my bodie. Wherefore we must either put no real presence at all, or els put such a real presence as is able to ve­rifie the foresaid speech, in proper and rigorous sence. But if B the bodie of Christ be not in the same place with the conse­crated Bread contained vnder the formes thereof, it cannot be said to be verily and really the body of Christ. For though we should suppose the Body of Christ to leaue heauen, and be substantially present in the Church where the Sacrament is giuen, yet this supposed presence would no waies fur­ther the verifying of the words of Christ, This is my Bo­die, except his bodie be vailed and couered with the sen­sible C accidents of Bread, so that it be demonstrated by them; and pointing vnto them, one may truely say, This is the Body of Christ. For why should consecrated Bread be tearmed truely and substantially the Bodie of Christ, if his body be not so much as in the same place with it? Wherefore the Fathers affirme, that Christ is so in this Sacrament, as he is vailed with the semblances of Bread, as S. Cyrill of Hierusalem in his Booke (highly commended by Dr. Whita­ker, Whitaker de sacris Scriptur. Cyril. Hierosol. Ca­tech. Mysta. 4. Caluin. in Ep. 1. ad Cor. c. 11. Institut. li. 4. ca. 17. §. 32. saith.) Let vs therefore with all certitude receiue the D Bodie and Bloud of Christ: For vnder the forme of Bread is giuen Thee his Bodie. Yea Caluin saith, In the supper, Christ Jesus, to wit, his Bodie and Bloud, is truely giuen vn­der the signes of Bread and Wine.

ANSVVER.

Although the mysticall words be not vnderstood properly and rigorously, yet we may truely and really (though spiritual­ly) E eat the Flesh, and drinke the Bloud of the sonne of man, by a liuing Faith, Ioh. 6.54. Aug. d. Doctr. Christ. li 3. c. 16. Fi­gura est, praecipiens passioni Domini es­se communicandū, & suauitèr [...] vtilitèr reconden­dum in memoria, quod pro nobis caro eius [...] & vulnerata sit. Id. d. verb. Dom. Ser. 33. Nolite [...] fauces sed [...]. Id. in Ioh. [...]. 25. Vt quid [...] dentem & ventrem, crede & manducasti.. 1. Cor. 10.16. The food which en­treth [Page 404] into the bodie must be locally present, but this food entreth A not into the bodie, but it is the bread of life which nourisheth the sub­stance of the soule, saith S. Ambrose Ambros. d. Sa­cram. li. 5. ca. 4. Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus, sed ille panis vitae aeter­nae qui animae no­strae substantiā ful­cit. Id. in Lu. l. 6. c. 8. Fide tangirur, fide videtur, nō tāgitur corpore nō occulis comprehenditur. d. Consecrat. Dist. 2. c. Quià corpus, Sacrū Dei tui, corpus & sanguinem fide res­pice, honora, mira­re, mente continge, cordis manu susci­pe, & maximè hau­stu interiore assu­mè.. But the Obiector deman­deth, Why consecrated bread should be tearmed truely & sub­stantially the body of Christ, if his bodie be not so much as in the same place with it? Our answer is, because of the Sacra­mentall vnion betweene the signes, and the bodie of Christ re­presented Aug. Ep. 23. Si Sacramenta quan­dam similitudinem [...] rerum qua­rum Sacramenta sunt, non haberent, omninò Sacramenta non essent. Ex hac autem similitudine plerumquè etiàm ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt. Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum, Sacrametum corporis Christi, corpus Christi est Sacramentum sangui­nis Christi, sanguis Christi est: Ita Sacramentum fidei fides est. Bernard. Serm. d. Coena Dom. Sa­cramentum dicitur sacrum signum, siuè sacrum secretum. Multa quidem fiunt proptèr se tantum, alia vero prop­tèr alia designanda, & ipsa dicuntur & sunt signa, vt enim de vsualibus sumamus exemplum, datur annulus proptèr annulum absolutè, & nulla est significatio; datur etiam ad inuestiendum aliquem de hereditate & sig­num est. Ità vt iàm dicere possit qui accepit annulum, annulus non valet quicquam, sed haereditas est quam quae­rebam, in hunc itaquè modum appropinquans passioni Dominus, de gratia sua inuestiri curauit suos vt inuisibi­lis gratia, signo aliquo visibili praestaretur. Ad hoc instituta sunt omnia Sacramenta, ad hoc Eucharistiae partici­patio, & Chrysma, ad hoc deniquè ipse Baptismus, initium omnium Sacramentorum, in quo complantamur mor­tis eius similitudini. Sicut enim in exterioribus diuersa sunt signa, vt què in coepto immoremur exemplo, multa D sunt inuestiturae, per quas inuestimur: verbi gratia inuestitur Canonicus per librum, Abbas per bacculum, Epis­copus per bacculum & annulum, sicut in eiusmodi rebus est sic & diuisiones gratiarum diuersis traditae sunt Sa­cramentis. Ambros. d. eis qui initiantur, c. 9. Post consecrationem sanguis nuncupatur, &c., and spiritually communicated to the worthie re­ceiuor, by that signe. As a Kings crowne may be called a king­dome, because it is a signe thereof, and the placing thereof vp­on the head may be a meanes of conferring a kingdome. So B likewise in Sacramentall speeches, the outward signe is called by the name of the thing signified, because it representeth it, and is by diuine institution an effectual instrument to applie and communicate the same, 1. Cor. 10.16. And by the same reason, Christs Bodie may be said to be in the bread, and his Bloud in the Cup, not by locall presence, or as wine is contained in a vessell (which S. Cyrill affirmeth not) but vertually, and by rela­tion and spirituall donation, because when the Minister deliuereth the outward signe, and the Communicant receiueth the same, The holy Ghost Turrecrem. sup. Decret. 3. pars d. consecrat. Dist. 2. cap. Corpus. Attribuitur Spiritu sancto, &c. est enim amor patris & filij. Aug. d. Trin. li. 3. ca. 4. deliuereth and communicates the thing C signified to the beleeuing soule.

IESVIT.

Whence it is also consequent, that the whole bodie of Christ is contained vnder a consecrated Host, be the same neuer so little; for by this mysterie, the bodie of Christ is E demonstrable by the sensible accidents, so that consecrated bread may be termed truly, really, & substantially, the bodie of Christ, not a parcell or part thereof only. But were not the bodie of Christ wholly and entirely vnder the formes [Page 405] of bread, consecrated bread could not truely and properly be A tearmed the bodie of Christ, but a sole part and [...] thereof. Againe, we haue no reason to beleeue the bodie of Christ is truely and really present in the Sacrament, but on­ly to the end that it may in the Supper be truely and really eaten, to nourish and feed mens soules. And if he be eaten onely mentally by Faith, we haue no ground to thinke that he is present more than mentally by Faith, the presence of Aug. c. Aduers. legis & Prop. ca. 9. Fideli corde & ore susci­pim' Christum Ie­sum. Cypr. d. Lapfis. [...]. li. d. Resurr. carnis, caro corpo­re Christi vescitur. Iren. li. 5. ca. 2. Nyss. cat. Chrys. ho. 83. irr Math. Theod. in ca. 11. 1. ad Cor. Leo, ser. 6. de Ieiunio septimi mensis. Quod side creditur ore sumitur. his bodie being ordained vnto the manducation thereof; for B else, why did he institute this Sacrament vnder the elements of Bread and Wine? But if Christ be not present wholly and totally vnder the forme of Bread, he cannot be truely and really eaten: Why then is his bodie brought from heauen to be there really present? or how can the bodie of Christ be­ing coextended in place according to the naturall dimensions thereof, enter into the mouth of the Receiuer, yea in at the mouth of the wicked and vnworthie, as Fathers teach? C

ANSWER.

That bodie which is neither circumscriptiuely, nor defini­tiuely present in the outward signes, is not substantially con­tained in the same. The bodie of Christ is neither of these waies present in the outward signes Turrecrem. sup. Decret. 3. pars d. Consecrat. dist. 2. ca. Quid sit. Corpus Christi, non est in Sacramento circū ­scriptiuè, quià non est ibi secundum commēsurationem propriae quantita­tis ad locum, nec est ibi definitiuè cū non sit ibi ita quod non alibi est.: not the first way, for in circumscription, the continent must be as large or ample as the thing contained: not the second way, for that which is de­finitiuely in one place, cannot at the same time be substantially in another. And yet, although the bodie of Christ is not ac­cording D to his materiall substance wholly and intirely vn­der the outward elements, notwithstanding the bread may truely be tearmed the bodie of Christ, because of a relatiue, Pactionall Estius 4. d. 1. §. 5. Virtus atquè efficientia quā pa­tres sacramētis tri­buunt, intelligi po­test efficax ordina­tio alicuius ad ali­quid, vt videlicet illo posito, hoc quo­què ad quod ordi­natumest, certo po­natur. Fauent. 4. d. 1. q. 4. disp. 2. c. 5. &c. 6. Exhibita illa ex­teriori ceremonia & signo externo, recordatur Deus pacti sui, & suā pro­missionem implet., and Sacramentall Vnion, and Donation of the things signified, together with the signes worthily receiued: For God Almightie hath made a Couenant with his Church, and faithfull people, to nourish their Soules with the liuely food of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ, Ioh. 6.32. He hath al­so appointed a Sacrament, in which there shall be made a repre­sentation E and commemoration of his passion vntill his com­ming againe, 1. Cor. 11.26, and he hath annexed a promise therunto, which is, that as often as the same is lawfully admini­stred, he will communicate to all worthie receiuers, the Bodie and Bloud of Christ, 1. Cor. 10.16. Now then, when the out­ward [Page 406] Sacrament is administred and receiued, as is aforesaid, A God remembring his Couenant, reacheth vnto the soules of his people, by the powerfull hand of the Holy Ghost, the very bodie of his Sonne crucified, and his blood shed, and powred out, and hereby feedeth and nourisheth them to eter­nall life.

The Obiect, or thing carnally and bodily receiued, is the Elementall Creature. The Obiect and thing receiued spiritu­ally and internally, is the bodie and blood of Christ, crucified vpon the Crosse. The Donour and distributer of this inward gift, is the blessed Trinitie, the Sonne of God himselfe, and B by appropriation, the Holy Ghost. The eating and drinking of it, is by Faith Caietan. O­pusc. [...]. 2. [...]. 2. d. Euchar. cap. 1. Manducare [...] Sacramentum, est per fidem formatam in charitate, in Chri­sto manere, & è conuerso Christum in ipso [...]. Jbid. c. 2. Caro Christi vera spiritualiter concludenda est in hoc Sacramento, & comesta [...] in hoc Sacramento, dat vitam aeternam. Et vsque adeo spirituali [...], hoc [...], vt [...], quod quantum [...] Christi [...] in Sacramento, nisi spiritu­aliter manducetur non prodest [...]., Iohn 6. 29. 35.40.47.

And thus if it be demanded, What kind and manner of Pre­sence we maintaine? It is answered: First, a mentall and intel­lectuall presence, by way of representation. Secondly, an ex­hibitiue C presence, by way of donation and Tradition, on Gods part; and faithfull reception on mans part, whereby wee possesse the thing giuen, and are vnited mystically to Christ our Head.

Now to the effecting hereof, locall and corporeall presence is not necessarie. A father and his sonne may bee absent by distance of place, one from the other, yet the sonne is truely and really vnited with his father, so as his fathers nature is in him, and he hath right in his fathers person and estate. A mans D goods may be at Constantinople, and yet he liuing in England is a true possessour, or owner and proprietarie of them, and he may communicate and vse them, and distance of place hin­dreth not his right and proprietie. Now although there bee a difference betweene things temporall and spirituall, yet thus farre there is agreement, That euen as wee possesse temporall meanes, being locally absent; so likewise wee may receiue and partake Christs bodie and blood locally distant, by the power of Faith, and by the donation of the Holy Ghost, according to a celestiall and spirituall manner. For in Baptisme Tertull. d. Re­sur. Carn. cap. 8. & cap. 48. we are wash­ed E with the blood of Christ, and wee put on the Lord Iesus, Gal. 3.27: Now that which is absent, cannot wash, or bee put on, in a naturall manner, but a spirituall vnion and application is necessarie: Euen so, in the holy Eucharist, wee are nourished with the bodie and bloud of our Sauiour; but to the perfor­mance [Page 407] hereof, locall presence, or presence by indistance of place, A is of no vse; but a spirituall vnion and application is sufficient.

These things premised, the Iesuits Argument is answered as followeth:

First, The bodie and bloud of Christ are in such sort truly and really presented in the holy Eucharist, as that they are truly and really eaten, not bodily, but spiritually, by Faith.

Secondly, Although they be receiued by Faith onely, yet they are truly and really communicated, by the powerfull ope­ration of the Holy Ghost.

Thirdly, Christs bodie is not brought locally from Heauen B vnto Earth; but being crucified vpon the Crosse, is symbolli­cally represented vpon Earth by the Sacramentall signes, and actions; and being locally at this day sitting on Gods right hand in Heauen, is also truly and effectually communicated and giuen to worthie Communicants.

Fourthly, The Sacrament is not instituted in vaine, although Christs bodie and bloud are not locally present in the outward Elements: For if vpon the worthie receiuing of the Sacra­ment, the Holy Ghost truly and effectually communicates vnto vs Christs bodie and bloud, to be the food and life of our C soules, and doth not so effectually and fruitfully communicate the same by any other meanes; then there is great vse of this Sacrament, and vnspeakable benefit receiued by it, although Christs bodie and bloud are not locally contained within the outward signes.

Fifthly, The Fathers teach not, that Infidels and wicked persons receiue in, at their bodily mouth, the naturall bodie and bloud of Christ.

First, The Fathers cited in the Margine of the Iesuits booke, speake not of wicked and vnworthie persons. D

Secondly, They affirme expressely, That Infidels and wicked persons receiue the bodie of Christ onely Sacramento tenus Aug. d. Ciu. Dei l. 21. c. 25. & in [...]. tr. 27. Huius rei Sa­cramentum &c. Su­mitur à quibusdam ad vitā à quibusdā ad exitiū. Res vero ipsa cuius & Sacra­mentum est, omni homini ad vitā nulli ad exitium, quicū (que) ei' particeps fuerit., that is, according to the visible signe; and not reuera, in truth, and in deed; Panem Domini, non Panem Dominum Id. in Ioh. tr. 59., The Bread of the Lord, and not the Bread which is the Lord (or the Lords Bodie.) The Author bearing the name of S. Cyprian Cypr. d. Coena Dom. n. 22., saith, Lambunt Petram, Wicked men (like AEsops Foxe) licke the out­side of the Rocke, but sucke not out the Honey. They receiue (saith Bernard Bern. in Cant. Ser. 33.) Corticem Sacramenti & furfur Carnis, the out­ward Barke of the Sacrament, and the Branne of Christs flesh. E Beda Beda, sup. Exo. d. Agno Paschali., Omnis Infidelis non vescitur carne Christi, No vnbeleeuer eateth the flesh of Christ. Hilarius Hilar. d. [...]. l. 8., Panis qui descendit de Coelo, non nisi ab eo accipitur qui Dominum habet & Christi membrum est, The Bread which came downe from Heauen, is receiued of [Page 408] him onely, which hath the Lord, and is a member of Christ. A Cyril of Alexandria Cyril. in Ioh. lib. 4. cap. 14. Im­pij cum non vi­uant, nec refor­mentur ad immor­talitatem, non man­ducant illam car­nem., For as much as wicked men doe not liue, nor are reformed to immortalitie, they eat not that flesh. Origen Orig. in Matth. cap. 15. pag. 17. Am­bros. d. Sacram. lib. 5. cap. 1. Bibit populus Dei, qui gratiam Dei consecutus est. Et cap. 5. Qui manducauerit hoc corpus fiet ei remissio peccatorum., If it were possible for one, perseuering a wicked man, to eat the Word, which became Flesh, being liuing Bread, it would not haue beene writ­ten, Whosoeuer eateth this Bread, shall liue for euer. S. Chrysostome Chrysost. ex var. in Matth. Hom. 9., This Bread filleth the mind, and not the belly; this is our Bread, and the Bread of Angels.

Thirdly, Whereas some of the Fathers say, That the bodie B of Christ is receiued into the mouth; they vnderstand by the bodie of Christ, the Sacrament or outward signe of his bodie: as appeareth not onely by their owne Exposition, where they call the outward signe a figure of Christs bodie August. contra Adimant. c. 12. Non dubitauit Dominus dicere, Hoc est cor­pus meum, cum sig­num daret corporis [...]. Tertull. c. Marc. lib. 4. c. 40. August. in Leuit. q. 57. Solet res quae significat eius rei nomine quam significat nuncupari. Idem, epist. 23. Exhac simili­tudine C plerumque etiam ipsorum retum nomina accipiunt.; but also be­cause they say, the bodie of Christ is visibly eaten, and his bloud is visibly drunke Idem, d. verb. Apost. Serm. 2. Ambros. d. Sa­cram. li. 4. ca. 4. Similitudinem praetiosi sanguinis bibis.. Also they affirme, That the bodie of Christ is spirituall food, and passeth not into the bodie August. in Psa. 98. Ambros. d. Sacram. li. 5. c. 4. Non iste Panis est qui vadit in corpus, sed ille Panis vitae aeternae, qui animae nostrae substantiam fulcit., but into the soule.

IESVIT.

Wherefore, seeing we must of necessitie grant, as I haue prooued, That some part of the Bodie of Christ is vnder consecrated Bread, penetrating the same, and occupying D the same place with it, Why should wee doubt, to beleeue the whole Bodie of Christ to be wholly and totally in euery consecrated Hoast?

ANSVVER.

The Question is, Whether the whole Bodie of Christ is en­tirely and totally in euerie consecrated Hoast? that is, Whether the true and substantiall Bodie of Christ, which is an humane bodie, essentially and in kind differing from a Spirit, and hauing E magnitude, proportion, order, and distinction of parts, is contai­ned vnder euerie small crumme of consecrated Bread? The Iesuit propugneth this Paradox in manner following.

IESVIT. A

For if we can beleeue that two bodies bee in the same place at once, we may as easily beleeue the same of twentie. And if we grant that one part of Christs body doth pene­trate, that is, occupy the same roome, with the quantitie of Bread, Why should we not thinke, that the rest of his parts may also doe the like? Our Sauiour saith, That it is as ea­sie Mat. 19. v. 24. & 26. for a Cammell to passe through a needles eye, as B for a rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen, adding, Though these things be impossible to men, yet all is possible vnto God. If then God can put a whole Cammell in the eye of a needle, is he not able to put the whole body of Christ within the bignesse of a consecrated Hoast? The bo­dy being mortall and passible could penetrate the body of his Mother, and come out of her wombe through the same still remaining entyre, as we professe in the Creede to beleeue, C Natum de Maria Virgine, Why then may not the same bo­dy, being now glorious, immortall, and (as the Apostle 1 Cor. 15. 44. speakes) spirituall, penetrate the quantitie of the Bread, and inclose it selfe wholy and intirely within the small compasse thereof: and Christ that made heauie things not to weigh, as the body of Peter walking on the water; coloured things Math. 15. 26. not to be seene, as his owne person, which he so oft made in­uisible Luc. 4. 30. to the Iewes; bright things not to shine, as his body D Ioh. 20. after his Resurrection, more bright than the Sunne, did not shine in so many apparitions to his Disciples; finally, a fla­ming furnance not to burne the bodies of the three children, Dan. 3. 30. cast into the midst thereof, Why may not hee keepe a body from occupying a place, or from extruding another bodie from the place where it is? for to occupie a place or to ex­trude thence another body, is but an effect consequent and flowing from the nature of a quantitatiue substance, as to E weigh, to be seene, to shine, to burne, be the naturall and ne­cessarie effects of heauie, coloured, bright, and fierie things.

ANSVVER. A

We must beleeue whatsoeuer God hath reuealed. But God hath reuealed that Christ hath a true body, and all proprieties and attributes essentiall to a true body, Heb. 2.16. Luc. 24. 39. And therefore the Romish doctrine, which conuerteth the in­diuiduall, and finite body of Christ, into a Spirit, and fancie, and destroyeth the true properties of the same, affirming that is not circumscript, palpable, or situated in one particular place at once, is erroneous Aug. Serm. d. Mont. c. 9. Corpora quae non possunt esse nisi in loco in Ioh. [...]. 31. Christus homo secundum Corpus in loco est & de loco migrat, & cum ad alium locum venerit in eo loco vnde venit non est. Epist. 57. Spatia locorū tol­le corporibus & nusquam erunt & quia nusquam erunt nec erunt. Sup. Psal. 86. Angustias omnipotentiae corpora patiuntur, nec vbique possunt esse nec semper: Diuinitas autem vbique presto est.; neither can that be one and the same in­diuiduall body, betweene which, are interposed many bodyes: B but betweene the one indiuiduall body of Christ in heauen, and the same body in the Eucharist, many other bodies, to wit, the seuerall bodies of the Heauens, the Ayre, the Pixe, &c. are in­terposed; and the body of Christ in heauen, is not ioyned to the sacramentall body, by continuation or indiuision.

But it is obiected, a whole Cammell may bee in the eye of a needle, Math. 19. 24. 26. The passible body of Christ, pas­sed C through the Virgins wombe, the same being closed and not opened; Peters heauie body walked aboue the waters; the bodyes of the three young men continued in the fierie ouen, vnconsumed, or scorched; Christs body was diuers times inuisible, and once it was resplendent as the Sunne, &c. There­fore the now glorified body of Christ, by the omnipotent po­wer of God, may be separate from circumscription, length, and thicknesse, and other effects and properties of indiuiduall humane bodies.

It is answered, the examples mentioned in the Antecedent, D are set vpon the Racke: for our Sauiour affirmeth not, that a Cammell continuing in his ordinarie quantitie, can passe through the eye of a small needle; but he saith onely, that this may as easily be fulfilled, as a rich man Hier. Mat. 19. Hoc dicto oftendi­tur non disficile es­se, sed impossibile. Si enim quomodo Camelus non po­test intrare per fo­ramen acus, sic di­ues non potest in­trare in regna coe­lorum nullus Diui­tum saluus erit. Sed etsi legamus Esaiam, quomodo Cameli Madian & Cepha veniant Hierusalem cum donis [...] muneribus; & qui prius curui [...] & vitiorum prauitate distorti, ingrediantur [...] Hierusalem; videbimus quo modo & isti Cameli, quibus Diuites comparantur, cum deposuerint grauem Sarcinam peccatorum, & [...] corpo­ris [...], intrare possunt per angustam portam & arctam viam quae ducit ad vitam. Aug. q. Euang. li. 2. ca. [...]. (which maketh Mam­mon his God) may enter into the kingdome of heauen. Prouer­biall speeches, Parables Athanas. c. Arian. orat. 3. [...]. and suppositions, are not according to euery passage in them, to be strayned or expounded literally Luc. 17.6. Math. 7.3. If it be further said, it followeth in the Text, All things are possible with God. Math. 19. 26. Marc. 10. 27. Luc. 18.27. E

[Page 411] Our Answere is, First, these words are referred to the latter A part of Christs speech, touching the rich mans entrance into heauen, and not to the Cammels passing thorow the needles eye Ambros. Ser. 4. Caiet. in Math. cap. 19.. Secondly, all things agreeable to truth Theoph. Marc. 10. Dicimus Deus verax est, facere au­tem id quod factum est, quod non sit factum est men­dacium, quo pacto faciet verax men­dacium? Prius [...] perderet naturam suam: & ita qui sic loquuntur [...] loquuntur: ac si [...]. Num potest Deus non esse Deus., and which God will haue done, are possible: but that it is agreeable with Truth, for a Cammell retaining his quantitie, with the whole bodie, to passe thorow the eye of a needle; or that God will haue this to bee, or that it is his will, that the bodie of Christ shall bee separated from circumscription, and continencie of place, deserueth to be credited when the Aduersaries prooue B it by Diuine Reuelation, or by other demonstration.

Secondly, The Scripture affirmeth not, nor yet the Apostles Creed, that the blessed Virgin in [...] trauell, in Puerperio, bare Christ in a different manner from other women, Luk. 2.23. and what a sophisticall inference is this, the Creed hath, Borne of the Virgin Marie, meaning according to conception, generation, and clearenesse from the companie of man, Ergo, the bodie of C the blessed Virgin was not opened at the time of Christs birth. Also many Fathers Tertul. d. car. Chri. c. 23. Etsi vir­go concepit, in par­tu suo nupsit, ipsa patefacti corporis lege in quo nihil interfuit de vi masculi admissi, an emissi, id est, illud sexus resignauit. Haec denique vulua est propter quam & de alijs Scriptum omne masculinum adaperiens vuluam Sanctum vocabitur Domino. Orig. Hom. 14. in Luc. Ambros. in Luc. lib. 2. cap. 2. Vid. Suar. in 3. to. 2. Disp. 5. Sect. 2. & Ib. Disp. 16. Sect. 1. Chrys. Am­bros. Origen. Greg. Niss. &c. Sentiunt [...] singulari modo [...] vuluam matris., and some Schoolemen Durand. 4. d. 44. q. 6. Palud. 4. d. 44. q. 3. ar. 3. denie this, and therefore from an Antecedent, doubtfull and in question, a con­sequent or conclusion of Faith cannot be inferred.

Thidly, The example of Peter, Math. 14. 29. and the three D yong men Daniel 3. prooue not the question; for the miracle might be in the water, and in the fire [...]. Com. Dan. 3. Potuit Deus, &c. pa. 178. Cornel. d. Lap. in Daniel. 3. v. 49. Hij pueri abigne serua­ti sunt. 1. Quia Angelus excussit ignem, eumque ab eis abegit, &c. 2. Quia auram quasi ventum [...] loco & vice ignis super­naturaliter induxit, &c. 3. Deus huius venti actionem scilicet refrigerationem continuauit, ac consequenter ignis vicini si quis erat actionem in eam partem vbi tres pueri erant, vel habetauit vel [...], vel omnino suspendit, concursum suum ei subtrahendo., and not in the bodies of S t. Peter, and the three yong men. S t. Luke c. 4.30. affirmeth not, that our Sauiours bodie was inuisible, but that he passed thorow the midst of the people: and yet admitting, that he was then inuisible, the cause might be in the peoples eyes, Luke 24. 16. or in the Aire, and not in his bodie, Genes. 19. 11. Neither is actuall grauitie, or actuall combustibilitie, or visibilitie so in­separable from a bodie, as circumscription and distinction E of parts.

Lastly, For a bodie to bee resplendent, and to shine as the [Page 412] Sunne in glorie, is not repugnant to the nature of the bodie, A but is of the perfection and happinesse thereof, Matth. 13. 43. But that an indiuiduall bodie may bee in many places at once, and in diuers formes, and according to diuers actions Petig. 4. d. 10. q. 2. ar. 2. Occhagauia. d. Sacramentis d. Euchar. tr. 1. q. 22. n. 6. Tribarn. 4. d. 10. q. 2. Disp. 33., and haue no reference to place, nor any properties, inward or outward of a true bodie, is not Diuine veritie, but an audaci­ous fiction, or rather an incongruous dreame, and contra­dictorie Chymera. But that is verified in this Question of the Romists, which Ireneus saith Iren. c. Haer. lib. 5., Multa male oportet interpre­tari eos, qui vnum non volunt rectè intelligere: They are com­pelled to expound many things amisse, which will not vnder­stand B one thing aright.

IESVIT. § 2. Transubstantiation belongs to the substance of the Reall Presence.

THis J prooue: That belongs to the substance of this C Mysterie of the reall Presence, which being denied and taken away, the words of Christ, This is my Bodie, cannot be true, taken in the literall sence, in which sence they are to be taken, as hath beene shewed. But with­out granting Transubstantiation, the words of Christ can­not be true, taken in the literall sence, Ergo, Transubstan­tiation belongs to the substance of this Mysterie of the reall D Presence. The Minor is prooued.

Because these words, This is my Bodie, signifie that the thing the Priest holds in his hand, is truely, really, and substantially the bodie of Christ; for in this Proposition, This is my Bodie, the Verb, est, signifies a coniunction betweene this in the Priests hand, and the bodie of Christ; and being a Verb substantiue, taken in his proper signifi­cation, it signifies a substantiall Identitie betweene this in E the Priests hands, and the bodie of Christ. But this in the Priests hands, being before Consecration, bread (a thing substantially distinct from the bodie of Christ) cannot by consecration bee made substantially the bodie of Christ, [Page 413] as the Fathers teach it is, without some substanti­all A Amb. l. 4. d. Sacr. c. 4. Vbi accesserit con­secratio de pane fit Caro Christi. Aug. Ser. Qui cita­tur a Beda in c. 10. 1. ad Cor. Nyssen. Or. Cate­chetica. alteration, or change: and what other substanti­all change can make bread to become truely the bodie of Christ, beside substantiall conuersion of the same into his Bodie.

ANSVVER.

You cannot demonstrate, that our Sauiours words must be B expounded literally, for the Instance of the cup, Luke 22.20. (besides other Arguments) choakes you; and therefore the mayne ground of your Doctrine being sandie, the Arguments inferred vpon the same are infirme.

The waight of the first Argument lyeth in this Propo­sition: Our Sauiours words cannot bee expounded literal­ly, vnlesse the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation bee granted.

I answere: First, if Transubstantiation were admitted, the words of Christ, This is my bodie, This Cup is the New Testament in my blood, cannot bee litterall; for where there is any figure C or trope, the speech is not literall: but in the Sacramentall words, there is some figure or trope, by our Aduersaries con­fession Reade before, pag. 396..

Secondly, If the said words be vnderstood litterally, then the bodie of Christ is properly broken, and his blood proper­ly shed in the Eucharist: for Saint Paul saith, This is my bodie which is broken for you, 1. Cor. 11.24. Saint Luke, This cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you. But the bodie of Christ is not properly broken Bellarm. d. Eu­char. lib. 1. cap. 12. In Mysterio Eu­charistiae, fractio idem est quod immolatio siue Oblatio. Aquin. Com. 1. Cor. 11. Lect. 5. Corpus Christi non attingitur ab huiusmodi fractione., nor his blood properly shed in the holy Eucharist. D

Thirdly, It is an improper speech to say, This is my bodie, that is, the thing contained vnder these formes Bellarm. d. Eu­char. lib. 1. cap. 11. Aquin. sup. 1. Cor. 11. Lect. 5., is by conuersion and substantiall Transmutation, my bodie: but Papists main­taining Transubstantiation, expound Christs words in this, or in some other manner Reade before, pag. 398., whereby they depart from the pro­prietie of the letter: therefore in the Doctrine of Transub­stantiation, they depart from the letter of the words, and con­sequently, E they make the same figuratiue.

IESVIT. A

But some may obiect, That as a man shewing a leather purse full of gold, may truely say, this is gold; or a paper wrapt vp full of siluer, may say, this is siluer: so the bodie of Christ being vnder consecrated bread, wee may truely say, This is the bodie of Christ, though the substance of bread remaine.

ANSWER. B

Many famous scholemen Scotus, 4. d. 11. q. 3. lit. B. Circà hoc erant tres opinio­nes: vna quod pa­nis [...], & tamē cum ipso vere est corpus Christi: a­lia, quod panis non manet, & tamen nō conuertitur sed de­sinit esse, [...] per annihilationem, vel per resolutionem in materiam, vel per corruptionem in [...] tertia, quod Panis transubstantiatur in corpus, & Vinum in sanguinem Christi. At (inquit) 1. Veritas Eucharistiae saluari po­test sine ista Transubstantiatione. 2. Substantia Panis sub speciebus [...] est nutrimentum, quam accidentia, ergo magis representat Christi corpus in ration e nutrimenti spiritualis. 3. Iste intellectus, quod non sit [...] sub­stantia Panis, videtur difficilior ad sustinendum, & ad ipsum sequuntur plura inconuenientia, quam ponendo ibi esse substantiam Panis. 4. Mirum videtur, quare in vno articulo, qui non est principalis articulus fidei, debeat talis intellectus asseri, propter quam, fides pateat contemptui omnium sequentium rationem. Et posteà, nihil est tenendum tanquam de substantia fidei, nisi quod potest expressè haberi de Scriptura, vel expressè declaratum est per Ecclesiam, vel euidentèr sequitur ex aliquo planè contento in Scriptura, velplanè determinato ab Ecclesia, &c. Nunc autem non videtur expressè haberi non esse ibi substantiam Panis. Nam Ioh. 6. Vbi multum probatur ve­ritas D Eucharistiae, planum est, vbi Christus dicit, Ego sum panis viuus, 1. Cor. 11. Paulus. Panis quem frangimus, nonnè communicatio corporis Christi? Necinuenitur vbi Ecclesia istam veritatem determinet solemniter, nec [...] qualitèr [...] possit ab [...] manifesto credito euidentèr inferri. Durand. 4. d. 11. q. 1. Occham. Centilog. Theol. Con. lib. 4. q. 6. & 4. Sent. d. 11. q. 6. Camerac. 4. d. 11. q. 6. ar. 1. Biel. Can. Miss. lect. 40. H.. teach, that the doctrine of Con­substantiation, to wit, such a presence as maintaineth the sub­stance of Bread and Wine to remaine together with the Bodie and Bloud of Christ, is in it selfe more probable, and were ra­ther to be followed than the doctrine of Transubstantiation, but onely because of the contrarie definition of the Romane Church: and some of these Doctors hold, that the opinion of Transubstantiation is not verie antient Suares. refert. in 3. tom. 3. disp. 50. sect. 1.. And Card. Caietan af­firmeth C Caietan. 3. q. 75. ar. 1. Impress. anno 1528. Dico autem ab Ecclesia, quoniam non apparet ex Euangelio, coactiuum aliquod, ad intelligendum haec verba propriè. Ex subiunctis siquidem verbis à Domino, scilicet quod pro vobis tradetur in Remiss. peccatorum, non potest concludi euidentèr, praemissa verba esse intelligenda propriè, quià litera quod, non refert coniunctionem praedicati cum subiecto, licet refert praedi­catum, scilicet corpus meum. Cum cuius relationis veritate stat praeiacentem esse veram solum in sensu Metapho­rico, vt patet in [...], Petra autem erat Christus, &c. Jbid. Quod Euangelium non explicauit expressè, ab Ec­clesia accepimus, [...] Panis in corpus Christi, &c. Alph. [...]. c. Haeres. li. 8. v. Indulgentia. De Transubstantiatione Panis in corpus Christi, rara est in antiquis scriptoribus mentio., that secluding the authoritie of the Roman Church, there is nothing in the Scripture which may compell one to vnderstand the words properly.

IESVIT. E

I answer, that when substances are apt of their na­ture, and ordained by vse to containe other substances, then [Page 415] shewing the substance that containes, we may signifie the A substance contained, as in the former examples: The rea­son is, because their naturall aptitude to containe other things being vulgarly knowne, mans vnderstanding straight passes from the consideration of the substances containing, to thinke of the thing contained therein. But when substances are not by nature and custome ordained to containe others, we cannot by shewing them, demonstrate another, because their outward forme signifies immedi­ately B the substance contained in them. For example, one puts a peece of gold in an apple, and shewing it, cries, this is gold: in rigor of speech he sayes not true, because the sence of his word is, that the thing demonstrated immedi­ately by the formes and accidents of that apple is gold. Yea put the case, that one should say this is gold, shewing a peece of paper vnfolded, in a manner not apt to containe any thing in it, he should not say true, though by some de­uise C hee had put secretly into it a peece of gold: because when the paper is shewed, displaied, and not as contai­ning something in it, and yet is tearmed gold; the pro­per sence of that speech is, that the substance immediat­ly contained vnder the accidents of paper is gold, although it be couered with other accidents than those that vsual­ly accompanie the nature of gold. Wherefore the propositi­on of Christ, This is my Bodie, being spoken of a thing D that naturally is not apt, nor by custome ordained to containe an humane bodie: it cannot be vnderstood litterally, but of the subiect immediately contained vnder, and demon­strated by the accidents and outward semblance of Bread. Now the thing that lyes hidden immediately vnder the ac­cidents of Bread, which was once substantially Bread, can­not become substantially the bodie of Christ, except it bee substantially conuerted into his bodie, or personally assumed E by the same bodie. And seeing this second manner of vni­on betweene Bread and Christs Bodie, is impossible, and re­iected by Protestants, as well as by Catholickes: Wee may conclude, that the mysterie of Christs reall presence cannot [Page 416] be beleeued in truth by them that deny Transubstantiation, A specially seeing our Sauiour did not say, here is my Bodie, which speech may be verefyed by the presence of his Bo­die locally within the Bread, but This is my Bodie, which imports, that not onely his Bodie is truely and substantially present, but also that it is the substance contained immedi­ately vnder the accidents of Bread,

ANSWER. B

First, if a substance be either by nature, humane Custome, or diuine Ordination, appointed to containe another substance, then demonstrating the externall substance which containes, we may signifie the hidden substance contained Fauentin. in 4. Sent. Disp. 45. ca. 4. Signato Marsu­pio verè dicitur hoc est aurum, licet ali­quid argenti sit ad­mixtū: Et hoc [...] est, seruata omni proprietate verbo­rum.. But accor­ding to that Tenet, which maintaineth Consubstantiation, the substance of bread is by diuine Ordination appointed to con­taine the substance of Christs bodie; therefore demonstrating by words the substance of bread, one may signifie the hidden substance, which is Christs bodie.

Secondly, Scotus Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3., Durand Durand. ib. q. 1. n. 14., and Paludanus Palud. ib. q. 2. n. 24. Petig. 4. d. 11. q. 3. ar. 2. Doctores ramen hic & Du­rand. q. 1. huius d. & Paludanus q. 2. & Occham. quod. 4. q. 29.30. & Thom. ab Arg. in 4. d. 11. q. 1. ar. 2. & Gab. in Can. lect. 41. Dicunt ex his verbis non concludi necessario, conuersionem seu Transubstantiationem Panis in corpus Christi, quamuis enim sub speciebus maneret substan­tia Panis, dummodo cum illa simul adesset substantia corporis Christi, verè & propriè potuisset à Christo dici. Fa­uentin. 4. disp. 45. ca. 4. affirme, that al­though C the substance of Bread remaine, yet because the sub­stance of Christs bodie is also present, it might truely and pro­perly be said by our Sauiour, This is my Bodie. Now if such pro­found Scholemen haue weighed the Iesuits obiection, & do find the same light, the propugnors of Consubstantiation haue smal reason to regard it.

Thirdly, the former obiection is nothing to vs, which main­taine D a true mysticall presence Cyprian. d. vnct. Chrys. n. 7. Dedit ita (que) Dominus no­ster in mensa in qua vltimum cum Apostolis partici­pauit conuiuium, proprijs manibus Panem & Vinum, in Cruce vero manibus militum corpus tradidit vulnerandum, vt in Apostolis secretius impressa sincera veritas & vera sinceritas, exponeret gentibus quomodo Vinum & Panis Caro esset & sanguis, & quibus rationibus causae effectibus conuenirent, & diuersa nomina vel species ad vnam reducerentur essentiam, & significantia & signifi­cata E eisdem vocabulis censerentur. of Christ in the holy Eucha­rist, and refuse both Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation; for we beleeue, and are able to demonstrate, that our Sauiours words are figuratiue in part, and yet the true Bodie and Bloud of Christ are really and verely communicated Bertram d. corp. & sang. Dom. Nec ideò quoniamista dicimus pute­tur in mysterio Sacramenti corpus Domini vel sanguinem ipsius non à fidelibus sumi, quando fides non quod occulis videt, sed quod credit accipit., according to the manner formerly declared, pag. 405.

IESVIT. A

Jf any man say that by this Argument it appeares, that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in Scripture, but from the words of the Jnstitution subtilly deduced, and so may perchance bee numbred inter scita Scholae, not inter dogmata Fidei: I answer, That the con­sequence of this Argument is not good, as is euident in the example of the Incarnation. The Doctrine that the vnion B of natures in Christ is proper, not Metaphoricall, substan­tiall, not accidentall, personall not essentiall, is no where ex­pressely set downe by Scripture, but by subtile deduction in­ferred from the mysterie which Scripture and Tradition deliuers. Notwithstanding, because these subtile deductions are proposed by the Church, as pertinent vnto the sub­stance of the foresaid mysterie, they cannot be denied with­out preiudice of Faith. In this sort the Doctrine of Tran­substantiation, C though not in tearmes deliuered by the Scripture, but deduced by subtile and speculatiue inference, may not be denied by them that will be perfect beleeuers, because the Church hath declared the same to pertaine to Concil. Rom. sub. Nicolao 2. Latera­nens. sub Inocen­tio 3. the proper sence of Christ his words, and substance of the mysterie.

ANSVVER. D

I know at whom you glance D. Andr. BB. of Winchester, c. Apolog. Bellarm. c. 1. pag. 11. De hoc est, firma fide rene­mus, quod sit. De hoc modo est (nem­pè Transubstantia­to in corpus Panc) de modo quo fiat vt sit, per siuè in, si­uè con, siuè sub, siuè trans, nullum inibi verbum est. Et quià verbum nullú, [...] à fide ablegamus procul: Intèr scita Scholae fortasse, intèr fidei articulos non ponimus., when you say, inter scita Scholae, but your solution, from the Doctrine of Incarnation, is not leuell to the scope: for illations are of two sorts; some are immediate, formall, necessarie, euident, and illustrious, to wit, Christ Iesus is a true and perfect man, therefore he hath an humane will: some are obscure, contingent, remote, and sophi­sticall, to wit, Christ said, This is my bodie, Ergo, the consecrate host is Christs substantiall bodie by Transubstantiation. Christ said, Do this in remembrance of me, Ergo, he made his Disciples E sacrificing Priests.

That which is deriued from Scripture the first way, is Do­ctrine of Faith: that which is inferred the other way, may be [Page 418] loose, vncertaine, infirme, and many times ridiculous, and appa­rantly A false.

Now let me intreate you, (vntill you prooue your deducti­on necessarie) to ranke your Popish Masse and Transubstantia­tion among this latter kind of deriuatiue Articles. Neither can the swelling vsurpation of Romish Prelates (which you stile the Church) make euery subtile speculation of Schoole­men Suares. in 3. p. Tho. to. 3. Disp. 50. Sect. 2. Hoc totum pendet ex Princi­pijs Metaphysicis & Philosophicis & ad fidei Doctrinā non est simpliciter ne­cessarium., and nice figment of humane wisedome Tertul. c. Marc. l. 5. c. 19. Omnes Haereses subtilo­quentiae viribus & Philosophiae regulis constant., an Article of Christian Faith, any more than a bragging [...], can by outfacing, conuert copper into gold: for Articles of Faith come downe from heauen by the holy Ghost, and are such B onely from their forme and originall causes. As for your Ro­mane Synode of Pope Nicholas, and your Laterane, vnder Innocent the third, These were your owne Idols, the definiti­ons that passed in them, were the breath of the Popes nostrils, and therefore why are you so fantasticall, as to enammell them, with the title and authoritie of the Catholicke Church? And in one of these conuenticles, your Pope hath so rudely and grossely De Consecrat. Dist. 2. ca. Ego Be­rengarius, verum corp' & sanguinem Domini nostri, &c. Sensualiter, non so­lum Sacramento, sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi & fidelium dentibus atteri. determined the Question of Reall presence, that Romists Gloss. ibid. Nisi sane in­telligas verba Berengarij, in maiorem incides Haeresin, quam ipse habuit. Tartaret. 4. d. 10. q. 1. Non [...] corpus, Christi, neque dentibus atteritur. Cassand. Consult. d. Transubst. Prudenter vidit & admonuit Author Glossae super Decret. Haec verba nisi sane intelligas, in maiorem incides haeresin quam ipse Berengarius habuit, 941. Caietan. Opusc. to. 2. d. Euchar. c. 3. themselues are now ashamed, and forced to Glosses and strained Expositions, to metamorphise and new mould C those vndigested crudities.

IESVIT. §. 3. D Transubstantiation was taught by the Fathers.

IT is certaine, the Fathers acknowledge a Transmutation of bread into the Bodie of Christ, and that they meant Transubstantiation, that is, not onely a mysticall and sig­nificatiue, but also a reall and substantiall change, appeares by these fiue Circumstances of their Doctrine in this point. E

ANSWER.

THat we may rightly vnderstand the testimonies of Fathers, alleadged in this question, wee are in the first place to exa­mine, [Page 419] what transubstantiation is, according to Papalls. The Tri­dent A Councell saith Conc. Trid. Ses. 13. Persuasum sē ­per in Ecclesia Dei fuit, id (que) nunc denuo sancta haec Synodus declarat, per consecrationem panis & vini, conuersionem fieri totius Substantiae panis, in sub­stantiam corporis Christi Domini nostri, & totius substantiae vini, in substantiam sanguinis eius. Quae [...] conuenienter & proprie à Sancta Catholica Ecclesia Transubstantiatio est appellata. Catech. Trid. d. Euchar. vt tota panis substantia diuina virtute, in totam Corporis Christi substantiam, totaque vini substan­tia, in totam sanguinis Christi substantiam, sine vlla Domini nostri mutatione conuertatur. Bonacin. d. Sa­cram. d. Euchar. Disp. 4. q. 3. p. 6. prop. 1. Transubstantiatio est conuersio, [...] transitus, totius substantiae in ali­am. Dicitur conuersio totius substantiae, ad distinctionem conuersionis partialis, per quam non tota substan­tia, sed sola forma [...], ad positionem alterius formae, quae dicitur generario, [...] transformatio. Dicitur B substantiae, ad distinctionem conuersionis accidentalis, qua vn um accidens desinit, ad position em alterius ac­cidentis, vt quando desinit calor, [...]. Rubeo. 4. d. 11. q. 1. Conuersio vt hic accipitur, non est ali­ud, quam rei totalis transitio in rem totalem: sic intelligendo, quia nihil eius quod transire seu conuerti dici­tur maneat post conuersionem, nec aliquid eius in quod conuertitur praefuerit ante ipsam, nisi conuersio ipsa esset in rem aliquam praeexistentem., It is a conuersion of the whole substance of Bread and Wine into the substance of Christs body and bloud, wrought by the words of consecration.

First, by the whole substance, they vnderstand the whole substantiall matter and forme Henriq. Summae li. 8. ca. 23. Coninch. d. Sacram. part. 3. q. 75. Nugnus. in 3. q. 77. ar. 1. Bellar. d. Euchar. Greg. Val. to. 4. Suar. to. 3. Vasques. Tapia. in. 3. Th. d. Euchar. q. 3. ar. 10..

Secondly, they affirme, that the whole substance of Bread C and Wine is destroyed Occhagau. d. Sacram. tr. 1. q. 17. n. 6. Haec desitio non est dicenda annihilatio, sed pleno ore dicenda est corruptio., or ceaseth to be.

Thirdly, the substance of Christs body and bloud, are pla­ced vnder the accidentall shapes of Bread and Wine.

Fourthly, by the force of the words of consecration, the sub­stance of Bread and Wine ceasing, the body and blood of Christ, acquire a new manner of being Bonacin. d. Sa­cram. d. Euchar. disp. 4. q. 3. punct. 6. §. Secundum. Cum autem per conuer­sionem, non solum constituatur Christus praesens sub speciebus, verum etiam producatur aliquis modus accidentalis', quo Chri­stus habens iam suum esse substantiale, vnitur per modum contenti cum speciebus, sicut antea substantia pa­nis sub illis continebatur, sequitur actionem conuersionis non modo dici adductiuam, verum etiam pro­ductiuam. D, vnder the externall formes, differing from his being in heauen.

Fiftly, the shapes and accidents of Bread and Wine subsist, Aquin. 3. q. 76. ar. 1. Facta conuer­sione panis in cor­pus Christi, vel vini in sanguinem, accidentia vtriusque manent. Concil. Bitur. cap. 6. negantes accidentia panis & vini in sacramento Eucharistiae sine substantia panis & vini manere, anathemate feriantur, & haeretici censeantur. without any materiall subiect of inherencie, and affect the senses, and nourish Bel. d. Euchar. li. 3. c. 23. sicut diuino miraculo, manent sine subiecto, ita etiam nutriunt vt Theologi docent., in like manner as formerly they did.

This doctrine of Popish Transubstantiation, is new, accor­ding to the iudgement of many learned Schoolemen Suar. in 3. Th. Disp. 50. Sect. 1. Tartaret. in 4. d. 10. q. 1. Non est necesse ad saluandum hoc, videlicet praesentiam corporis Christi in Sacramento, fugere ad con­uersionem panis in corpus Christi, quia à principio institutionis huius Sacramenti, fuit necessarium [...] corpus Christi esse sub illis speciebus, quia in hoc consistit veritas, & tamen non fuit in principio ita manifeste dictum, quod panis conuertatur in corpus Christi. Ioh. Yribarn. in 4. l. 11. q. 3. Disp. 42. Sect. 1. Jn primitiua Ec­clesia, de substantia fidei erat, corpus Christi sub speciebus contineri: tamen non erat de fide, substantiam panis in corpus Christi conuerti & facta consecratione illinc recedere.: and the E [Page 420] Primitiue Fathers neuer taught the same; for many of them A maintaine expresly, That the substance of Bread and Wine re­maine; and none of them affirme, either that the substance of Christs body and bloud, are placed vnder the naked formes and shapes of Bread and Wine; or that the Accidents haue no materiall subiect of inherencie; or that the body and bloud of Christ acquire a new being in the Sacrament, differing from that which they had formerly vpon the crosse, or which they haue not at this present in heauen. And transmutation, and transubstantiation, are different conuersions, as appeareth by the examples of Lots wife, changed into a pillar of salt, Gen. 19. B 26. and water changed into wine. Ioh. 2.9. for in these transmu­tations, the common materiall substance remaining, the formes and accidents were onely changed.

IESVIT.

First by the expressenesse of their words: for there can be no words more significant and expressiue of a substanti­all change betweene Bread and our Sauiours bodie, than those the Fathers vse. C

ANSWER.

Expresse words if they be figuratiue, prooue not a substanti­all change Chrys. in Mat. Hom. 83. Ipsum vi­des, ipsum tangis, ipsum comedes. Cyprian. d. Coena, Dom. n. 10. [...] haeremus, sangui­nem sugimus, & intra ipsa redemp­tioris nostri vulnera, figimus linguam.: for the Fathers vse words, which according to the letter, import a substantiall change, when they treat of regene­ration, and the Sacrament of Baptisme. Also treating of the ho­ly Eucharist, they affirme, that faithfull Communicants are changed into the body and flesh of Christ Chrys. in Math. Hom. 83. Nos se cum in vnam massam reducit, & reipsa nos corpus suum efficit. Leo. Ep. ad Cler. Const. in mystica distributione spiritualis alimoniae, hoc im­partitur & sumitur, vt accipientes virtutem coelestis cibi in carnem ipsius qui caro nostra factus [...], transea­mus. Rabanus. d. Instit. Cler. li. 1. c 31. Sicut illudin nos conuertitur dum id manducamus & bibimus, fic & nos in corpus Christi conuertimur, dum obedienter & pie viuimus., which our Aduer­saries D themselues vnderstand not of a substantiall change.

IESVIT.

S. Nyssen, That the word made flesh, is inserted with­in Orat. Cateche. ca. 37 [...]. euery faithfull man, by his flesh taking his consistence of E Bread and Wine, Consecration transelementing the nature of things appearing, into the same flesh.

ANSVVER. A

If the words of this Father be vnderstood of Transubstantiati­on, then the bodies of faithfull receiuers are conuerted into the substance of Christs flesh: for he saith, Whē the immortal body of Christ is within him which hath receiued it, it transmuteth him wholy into his owne nature Greg. [...] Orat. Catech. 37-Corpus à Deo mor­te affectū, cum fue­rit intra nostrum, totum ad se trans­mutat, & transfert, [...], Corpus immortale cum fu­erit intra eum qui sumpsit, vnluersum quoque transmutat in suam naturam.. Also the humane nature of Christ should be conuerted into the diuine nature [...]., and Christ should be commixed, and contempered with the bodies of be­leeuers; and bread should be changed into Christs bodie, as B meat is into mans bodie. Also Gregorie Nyssen saith Ib. Per suae gratiae dispensationem, se per carnem inserit omnibus credentibus, com­mistus & contemperatus corporibus credentium, &c. Nisi per cibum & potum visceribus inseratur [...]., That Christs body is inserted into beleeuers onely. Lastly, the word [...], Transelementation Theophylact. in Ioh. 6. 56. Qui manducat me viuit propter me, dum C quodammodo miscetur mihi & transelementatur in me, [...]., prooueth not Transubstantia­tion: for in Transubstantiation, the matter is destroyed, and the quantitie and accidents remaine; and in Transelementation, the matter remaineth, and the essentiall and accidentall formes are altered.

IESVIT.

S. Cyril saith (That we might not feele horror, see­ing flesh and blood on the sacred Altars) the Sonne of God condescending to our infirmities, doth penetrate with the power of life, into the things offered (to wit Bread and Wine) conuerting them into the veritie of his owne flesh, D that the body of life as it were a certaine seed of viuifica­tion might be found in vs.

ANSVVER.

This Tract of S. Cyril (according to Vasques Vasq. in 3. Tho. [...]. 3. Disp. 180. ca. 3. n. [...] Cyrillus Alexandrinus in Epistola ad Calo­syrium, E quae inter eius opera non habetur, illius tamen testimonium citat S. Tho. in Catena. in illud. Luc. [...]. & acc epto pane. the Iesuit) is not found among his antient workes, but cyted out of him by Thomas Aquinas, and therefore the authoritie thereof, may bee suspected; notwithstanding I answer as followeth.

First, S. Cyrill, by the words, Conuerting them into the veritie of his flesh, vnderstandeth not Popish Transubst. but mysticall and Sacramentall Conuersion, to wit, conuersion of significati­on, [Page 422] vse, and operation; for he speaketh of Bread and Wine, A not according to a part of their nature, to witte, their mat­ter and substance, but according to their whole nature, con­taining substance, accidents, and quantitie: now if the things offered [...]. li. 4. ca. 32. Aug d. fid. ad Petrum. ca. 19. Sa­crificium panis & vini, in fide & cha­ritate, sancta Ec­clesia Catholica, per [...] or­bem terrae, offerre non cessat. to God, in the holy Eucharist, are the whole creatures of Bread and Wine, and the same are conuerted into Christs flesh; then the accidents and quantitie are conuerted into Christs body, as well as the matter and forme, which Ro­mists deny.

Secondly, from the word Conuersion, Romists cannot prooue Transubstantiation: for if the conuersion, be onely of vse, rela­tion, B and operation, as in the water of Baptisme, then it follow­eth not, That because S. Cyrill taught conuersion, Ergo, hee taught Transubstantiation. And if it be a substantiall conuersion, then also there cannot be Popish Transubstantiation, for in this forme and substance perish, and the accidents remaine: in the other, the common matter remaineth, and the forme and acci­dents perish [...] non [...], siue [...], sed mutat [...]..

In all substantiall conuersions, naturall or miraculous, there is a new thing produced, out of that which is conuerted, as ap­peareth in the conuersion of Water into Wine, and Lots wife C into a Pillar of salt, &c. But in Popish Transubstantiation, the body of Christ is not produced anew Aureol. 4. d. 11. q 1. ar. 1. virtute transubstantiatio­nis, nō accipit cor­pus Domini esse post non esse, quo­niam prius erat.: for it is praeex­istent, and receiueth no substantiall change, by the confession of [...] themselues Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3. Fauentin. in 4. Disp. 35. ca. 6. Quae­ro quis sit terminus formalis huius a­ctionis (Transub.) & conuersionis? non est corpus Christi. quia illud est terminus mate­rialis, ergo termi­nus erit Christi [...] panis. Hoc autem totum est accidentale, & nihil addit in re nisi [...] realem sub [...].: neither is it substantially vnited vnto the accidents of Bread and Wine, for it giueth no subsistance to them, and it sustaineth them not, but it is vnited accidentally [...]. Corpus Christi in Eucharistia respicit accidentia omnino [...], ergo non potest [...] illorum [...] aliquem modum essendi substantialem, [...] ab [...], quem habebat antequam fieret [...] 8. [...] conuertitur in corpus Christi, quod nulla sit mutatio in ipso, nec habet aliquid [...] ad species quae est accidens. Petigian. [...]. Theol. in 4. d. 11. E q. 3. ar. 7. Terminus nouae actionis accipit esse per ipsam actionem, sed per Transubst. quae [...] actio noua, non accipit corpus Christi esse substantiale, sed presentialitarem ad species. Ergo corpus Christi non est terminus Transubst. secundum esse substantiale, sed solum secundum [...]. onely, by being made present where the substance of the Ele­ments formerly were. Now if water should be poured vpon the ground, or otherwise consumed, and wine be brought from [...], as haile and snow [...]. in 4. d. 11. q. 4. Disp. 44. Sect. 2. Grando & [...] adducuntur è coelo in terram, & secuudum quid [...], [...] in esse presentis in terra. Ibid. Tota ipsa Trausubst. est [...]. Ioh. d. colon ex Scoto q. 11. [...] cor­poris Christi in Eucharistia, est tantum respectus extrinsece adueniens. are, and be placed where water for­merly D was, here is no substantiall conuersion: so likewise when the substance of Bread and Wine cease, and Christs body and bloud are brought [...] the place where these were, no substan­tiall thing is produced, but one substance succeedeth in the roome of another, by that which they stile vbiation [...]. 4. d. 11. q. 1. ar. 3. Vbiatio est quando aliquid de vbi non, transit ad aliud vbi..

[Page 423] It is in vaine therefore for Romists to obiect the Fathers A words, speaking of conuersion of bread and wine into Christs bodie and blood, because in Popish Transubstantiation, there is not conuersion of bread into Christs bodie, but onely a locall succession of Christs bodie into the same vbitie, where the sub­stance of bread formerly was Aureol. 4. d. 11. q. 1. ar. 1. Praecise vnum succedit alteri, non est verum dicere quod illud, cui succeditur, accedat & conuertatur in [...] quod succe­dit, imo è conuerso [...] accedit ad illud cui succedit. Idem. ar. 2. Illud non transit in aliud, quod desinit, antequam perueniat ad illud, sicut non transit [...] qui desinit esse antequam perueniat illuc..

Thirdly, In all substantiall conuersions, either a new thing is B produced, or the old preserued. In Transubstantiation, no new thing is produced, nor any old preserued: Ergo, Transub­stantiation is no conuersion. If they answere, That some new thing is produced, to wit, an vnion of Christs bodie with the Sacramentall signes Bonacin. d. Sa­cram. d. [...]. Disp. 4. q. 3. p. 6. §. 2. Greg. Val. [...]. 4. Disp. 6. q. 3. punct. 2. & 3. [...] mutatio­nis illius non est simpliciter non esse, sed esse substantiale corporis Christi, non quasi de nouo productum, sed [...] succedens substantiae panis, [...] substantialem intimae cuiusdam coniunctionis substantiae suae, cum C ijsdem illis [...], [...] antea erat quo (que) per suam substantiam [...] coniunctus panis, & quidem [...] etiam, quodam naturae & rationis ordine, quam ab illis informaretur.. I answere, That when a garment and a bodie are vnited, here is no substantiall conuersion, or when a Diamond and gold Ring are vnited, or when the humanitie or Deitie are vnited in the person of Christ.

If they say, That the bodie of Christ [...] is preser­ued, as when nourishment Bellarm. d. Eu­char. lib. 3. cap. 18. Conuersio panis in corp' Domini, non est productiua nec conseruatiua, sed adductiua. Nam corp' Domini pre­existit ante con­uersionem, sed non sub speciebus pa­nis, conuersio [...] non facit vt corpus Christi simpliciter esse incipiat, sed vt incipiat esse sub speciebus panis. Greg. Val. to. 4. Disp. 6. q. 3. punct. 2. & 3. is receiued into the bodie, it pre­serueth the same; then I demand, Whether Christs bodie is preserued in regard of the being? and if they affirme, then it is also produced according to the being Fauentin. 4. Dist. 11. q. 3. Disp. 45. ca. 7. Scotus 2. d. 2. q. 1. ad 1. Conseruatio est continua­tio esse prehabiti, non tamen est [...] causationes & actiones, sed est actio vna & eadem, qua Deus primo crea­uit creaturam, quae respectu [...] temporis, quo creatura ponitur in esse dicitur creatio: respectu vero alio­rum sequentium dicitur [...]. Vasques 3. Tho. to. 3. Disp. 181. cap. 5. Si ali qua actio fuerit, vel, res aliqua cuius ipsa [...] non [...] causa, ca non potest esse Transubstantiatio aut terminus illius: atqui conseruatio Christi, non est actio proceedens à verbis [...], neque esse Christi permanens est [...] ipsorum. Ergo talis actio non potest esse Transubstantiatio, neque esse Christus terminus illius. Porro autem talem actionem & terminum, non posse à verbis [...] ab [...] patet, quia Deus etiam sine illis verbis, [...] prorsus modo Christum [...] in suo esse: [...], cum conseruat illis prolatis, [...] non [...] E [...], sed per accidens & concomitanter cum [...] se habet., because the same thing which produced the bodie of Christ, doth at this present onely preserue it, and no new thing super-added; but it is not pro­duced anew, Ergo, It is not preserued or continued in the D being which it formerly had, by any new Action.

If they answere, It is preserued according to the Sacramen­tall being: I reply, That this Sacramentall being, must be either the being of Christs bodie, according to matter and forme; but [Page 424] then Christs bodie receiueth no such being, for it was preexi­stent. A Or else it is the vnion and application of Christs bodie, to the Sacramentall signes; and then I reply, That this vnion is onely accidentall Vasques in 3. Tho. to. 3. Disp. 181. cap. 3. Vnio cum illis, quocunque modo fiat non po­test non esse acci­dentaria., and in regard of presentialitie and vbitie, and consequently it is no conuersion of bread into Christs bo­die, but a translation and adduction of Christs bodie from hea­uen, vnto the place of the substance of bread: but translation and adduction of one substance, into the roome or seate of another, is not substantiall conuersion Suar. to. 3. in 3. part. Tho. Disp. 50. Sect. 4. Per solam actionem adductiuam, reuera non explicatur vera conuerfio substantialis & Transubstantiatio, sed solum translo­catio B quaedam, quando vna substantia solum succedit loco alterius, non potest proprie dici vna conuerti in aliam., but alteration of place.

IESVIT.

Saint Chrysostome, When waxe is put into fire, no­thing Nihil substantiae remanet nihil su­perfluit, Chrys. Ho. d. Euch. in Encaen. of the substance thereof is left, nothing remaines vn­consumed: so likewise doe thou thinke that the Mysteries are consumed by the substance of the bodie of Christ. C

ANSWER.

This Father Chrysost. tom. 3. Hom. d. Euchar. in Encaen. Quemad­modum si cera igni adhibita illi assimi­latur nihil substan­tiae remanet nihil superfluit: sic & hic puta mysteria consumi corporis substantia. saith not, That nothing of the substance of bread and wine is left, but cleane contrarie, [...], No­thing of the substance goeth away: And the words which follow, [...], are falsly translated: for they are not, Is consumed by the substance, but, Is coabsumed with the substance. Also the substance of bread is not consu­med D by the bodie of Christ, according to the Tenet of many Schoolemen [...] 4. d. 11. q. 4. Maior. ib. q. 1. Gabr. ib. q. vnic. & in Can. Lect. 40. & 41. Occham. 4. q. 6. dub. 7. Dicunt pa­nis substantiā non desinere esse per illam actionem qua efficitur corpus Christi. Vasq. in 3. Tho. to. 3. Disp. 181. cap. 6. Fatentur & substantiam corporis & sanguinis suapte natura cum [...] panis & vini non pugnare vt eam destruat.. The substance of the externall elements, pas­seth into the bodie of the Receiuer, and is consumed, or vnited to the flesh of the Receiuer. The bodie and blood of Christ represented by the same, and receiued by Faith, nourish the soule to life eternall, Iohn 6. 54. And if our Aduersaries, fol­lowing their owne translation, will expound Saint Chrysostome literally, then Communicants receiue Christs bodie by the hands of the Seraphim Ne putetis quod accipitis Diuinum cor­pus non ab hoc, [...]., and not by the Priests hands. E

IESVIT. A

S. Ambrose, What arguments shall we bring to prooue, Ambr. de initian. Mysterijs, c. 9. That in the Sacrament is not the thing which nature hath Non hoc quod na­tura formauit, sed quod benedictio consecrauit. Bene­dictione enim ipsa natura mutatur. framed, but that thing which benediction hath consecrated; and that greater is the force of benediction, than of nature, seeing by the benediction euen nature is changed.

ANSVVER. B

The quantitie and accidents of the outward signes, are fra­med by nature, as well as the substance; and the force of conse­cration, and benediction passeth vpon the one, as well as vpon the other: and therefore the change of nature, which Saint Ambrose intendeth, is not the destruction of the elements Amb. d. Sacr. l. 4. c. 4. Vt sint quae e­rant & in aliud commutentur., and the conuersion thereof into another substance, but the eleuating of these earthly creatures, to be mysteries of grace, and holy instruments, to apply and communicate that which is represen­ted by them. C

a Ambros. d. Sa­cram. lib. 4. cap. 4. Tu ipse eras sed e­ras vetus creatura, postea quam con­secratus [...], noua creatura esse coe­pisti: vis scire quam noua creatura? Omnis is inquit in Christo noua creatura. Accipe ergo quemadmodum sermo Christi, [...] omnem mutare consueuerit & mutat quando vult instituta naturae. It is inconsequent to argue, They are changed in their na­ture, Ergo, Their naturall substance is destroyed: for nature implieth qualities Duraeus c. Whi­taker. [...]. pa. 59. Col. 2. Aquarius Formal. verb. Na­tura. and properties, as well as substance, and it is taken Theologicè, as well as Physicè; for S. Peter speaking of re­generate persons, 2. Pet. 1. v. 4. saith, They are made partakers of the Diuine nature, [...]: and yet his meaning is not, that their former substance is abolished. The nature of glori­fied bodies is changed, and they are made spirituall, 1. Cor. 15. 44. and yet they retaine the same substance. Mans nature was changed after his fall, Ephes. 2. 3. yet the substance of his na­ture remained. Saint Ambrose himselfe saith, That in Baptisme D man is changed, and made a new creature; and treating farther of the Sacrament of Baptisme, he saith, Learne how the word of Christ is accustomed to change euery creature, and when he will he alte­reth the course of nature.

IESVIT. E

Secondly, They require, that the Authour that chan­geth bread into Christ his Bodie, be omnipotent; and con­sequently, the change not meerely significatiue, but sub­stantiall. [Page 426] S. Cyprian, This Bread changed not in shape A Cyprian. d. Coena Domini. Panis non effigie, sed natura mutatus omnipo­tentia verbi factus est Caro. Cyril. Orat. 4. My­stagog. but in nature, by the omnipotencie of the word is made flesh. S. Cyrill, Hee that in the marriage of Cana chan­ged Water into Wine, by his onely will, is not hee wor­thie that we beleeue him that he hath changed Wine in­to his Bloud? S. Gaudentius, The Lord and Creator Gaud. Tract. 2. in Exod. of Natures, that of Earth made Bread, againe (because he can doe it, and hath promised to doe it) makes of Bread his owne Bodie; and he that of Water made Wine, now of Wine hath made his Bloud.

ANSWER.

S. Cyprian was not the author of the Booke de Coena Domini, so Bellarmine Bell. d. Script. Eccles. Et li. 6. ca. 2. d. Amiss. gratiae. Et d. Sacr. Confirm. li. 2. ca. 6. confesseth, and before him Iohannes Hessels Hessel. d. Com. sub vna specie, p. 62, but in some copies it passeth vnder the name of Arnoldus, who liued manie ages after Cyprian. And yet in one part of that worke, d. vnctione Chrysmatis Lib. d. Card. Oper. d. Vnction. Chrys. n. 7. Dedit Dominusnoster in mensa, in qua vltimum cum Apostolis participauit conuiuium, proprijs manibus panē & vinū: In cruce vero ma. nibus militum corpus tradidit vulnerandū, vt in Apostolis secretius impressa veritas, & vera sinceritas, exponeret gentibus, quomodo Vinum & Panis Caro esset & Sanguis, & quibus rationibus causae effectibus [...]: [...] nomina vel species, ad vnam reducerentur essentiam, & significantia & significata, eisdem vocabulis [...]., there is a manifest place against Tran­substantiation: Our Lord (saith he) in the table wherein he C banqueted with his Disciples, with his owne hands deliuered Bread and Wine, &c. declaring also how the thing signifying, and the thing signified are called by the same name.

Secondly, to a mysticall change, the omnipotent power of God is necessarie, as appeareth in the water of Baptisme Leo serm. 4. d. [...]. Christus de­dit aquae, quod de­dit [...]. Virtus e­nim altissimi, & ob­umbratio Spiritus Sancti, quae facit vt Maria pareret sal­uatorem, eadē fe­cit, vt vnda regene­ret credentem. Cy­prian. d. Chrysm. Sanctificatis elementis iam non propria natura praebet effectum, sed virtus diuina potentius operatur effectum., and D earthly creatures cannot be instruments of grace, or meanes to communicate spirituall or miraculous benefits without the same, as appeareth in the waters of Iordan, 2. Reg. 5. and in the poole of Bethesda, Ioh. 5. Therefore although some do require an omnipotent power to eleuate and change the creatures of Bread and Wine, yet it followeth not that they maintained Transubstantiation.

Thirdly, the author Cyprian. d. Coen. Dom. n. 6. Pa­nis iste quem Dominus [...] porrigebat, non effigie sed natura mutatus, omnipotentia verbi factus est caro: Et sicut in persona [...], humanitas videbatur & [...] diuinitas, ità Sacramento visibili, [...] diuina se infudit essentia. by the words, Natura mutatus, chan­ged E [Page 427] in nature, vnderstood not a corporall change, for in the A same sentence he declareth himselfe, by the example of Christs humanitie, which being personally vnited to the deitie, is chan­ged, but not so as that it looseth his naturall forme and sub­stance. And in the same Booke this Father faith Ib. n. 2. Sed immortalitatis ali­monia datur, à cō ­munib' cibis diffe­rens, corporalis substantiae retinens speciem. Sed virtu­tis diuinae inuisibili essentia probās ad­esse praesentiam., That al­though the immortall food (deliuered in the Eucharist) differ from common meat, yet it retaineth in the kind of corporal sub­stance. He saith not, Species in the plurall number, meaning ac­cording to the new Popish sence, the externall shapes and ac­cidents, (for let the Aduersarie prooue out of antiquitie, that B S. Cyprian, or the Primatiue Church maintained the late Ro­mish Doctrine concerning shapes of Bread and Wine, without the materiall substance, and we will freely grant that the Do­ctrine of Transubstantiation is antient) but he saith, Speciem, the kind, in the singular number, that is, the corporall substance and forme, in the same sence in which S. Ambrose Ambros. d. eis Qui. Myst. initiant. cap. 9. vseth the word, saying, Ante benedictionem verborum Coelestium alia species nomi­natur, Before the benediction of wordes (applied) it is called another kind of thing.

S. Cyrills place maintaineth not Popish Transubstantiation, for in this, the shapes and accidents remaine, and the materiall C substance is corrupted: but in our Sauiours miracle, Ioh. 2. the shapes, accidents, and forme were changed, and the materiall substance remained.

Gaudentius saith Gaud. Brix. to. 4. Biblioth. Col. tr. 2. Exod. Satis declarat San­guinem suum esse omne Vinum quod in figura passionis sua offertur. Bona­uent. d. 11. q. 6. in 4. sent. Omnia verba significantia inno­uationē circà cor­p' Christi sunt fal­sè dicta. Haec est simplicitèr impro­pria Corpus Chri­sti fit. Ne [...] pu­tes quod Coeleste effectum est per eū qui transit in [...]. Nam cum panem consecratum, & vinum Discipulis suis porrigerat, &c., The Lord makes Bread of his owne Bo­die, and he makes Wine of his Bloud: and then he saith fur­ther, of Bread he makes his owne Bodie, and of Wine his owne Bloud; but he saith not that this is done by Transub­stantiation (for Christs Bodie and Bloud are not transubstanti­ate) but calling the same coelestiall food, he declareth his mea­ning to be, that the change is spirituall and mysticall. And spea­king D of the elements of Bread and Wine, he affirmeth expres­ly, that our Sauiour deliuered consecrated Bread and Wine to his Disciples. If then, according to Gaudentius, the conse­crated signes which Christ deliuered his Disciples, were Bread and Wine, they were not abstracted shapes and figures of Bread and Wine: for where the matter and essence is abolished, and the accidents onely remaine, there is not the verie thing, but a shadow and image Gaud. ib. Figura non est veritas, sed imitatio veritatis. thereof onely. E

IESVIT.

Thirdly, the Instrument by which God workes this Transubstantiation, is by them acknowledged the most ef­ficacious [Page 428] that may be, to wit, the word not of man but of A God. S. Ambrose: Moses his word changed the water of Ambrosius de ijs qui Mysterijs con­uertuntur. c. 9. Egypt into blood, and againe turned them from bloud into water. If so great was the benediction of man, what may we thinke of diuine Consecration, where the verie words of our Sauiour worke? The words of Elias had power to bring downe fire from Heauen, and shall not the words of Ambros. lib. 4. d. Sa­cram. ca. 4. Christ haue force to change the kinds of the Elements? A­gaine, thou seest how working and efficatious is the word B of Christ. If therefore such vertue is in his Word, that thereby things that are not, receiue being, how much more hath it power that the things that are still, remaine (in the geneall latitude of being, and according to the sensible accidents) and be conuerted into another substance.

ANSWER.

Among the six or seuen examples brought by S. Ambrose, of C changes, only two are substantiall, and the rest accidentall: and the elements are changed, when of common and naturall crea­tures, they are made sacred, and become chanels and instru­ments of sauing grace. So the Fathers affirme, That the word of Christ in Baptisme is most efficacious, to alter the property of naturall water, and to giue regeneratiue force and vertue to it Leo d. Natiu. Christi, Serm. 4. Ambros. d. eis qui Myster. initiantur, ca. 3. Hier sup. Eia. li. 17. Prooem. Vox Domini super a­quas, &c. Aug. sup. [...]. Tract. 8. Cyril. sup. Ioh. lib. 2. ca. 42. Chry. in Mat. ho. 83.. Also the holie Scripture affirmeth concerning Euange­licall Doctrine, That it is the immortall Seed of God, the Word of eternall life, the Power of God to saluation, &c. 1. Pet. 1.29. Act. 5.20. & 14.3. Rom. 1.16. & the same conuerteth D people to God, Act, 2.37. and maketh them new creatures Chrys. to. 3. d. Fid. & Leg. Naturae. Lanae cùm tinguntur naturae suae nomen amittunt, & tincturae nomen accipiunt, &c. Si igi­tur tinctio naturae nomen transformat, cur Dei natura non transformat hominem, [...] vt is qui antè pulueris ge­rebat imaginem, post tincturam imaginem gerat fulgidam & plusquam coelestem?, 2. Cor. 5.17. & 1. Cor. 4.15. But yet from hence we cannot in­ferre, that either the water of Baptisme, or regenerate persons are changed by Transubstantiation.

IESVIT. E

Fourthly, The effect of this Transmutation taught by the Fathers, is the presence of the substance of Christs bodie, and the absence of the substance of Bread, binding [Page 429] vs to abnegate our senses, and not to beleeue what we seeme A to see with our eyes. Theophylact, Bread is transelemen­ted [...]. in. c. 4. 26. Math. or transformed by an ineffable creation, although to vs it seeme Bread, because we are weake, and haue horror to eate raw flesh, specially the flesh of man: for this reason Bread appeareth, but in essence and substance it is not Bread. S. Cyril, Come not therefore as vnto simple Bread Cyril. Hierosol. Ca­tech. Mystag. 4. and Wine, for it is the Bodie and Bloud of Christ, according to the affirmation of our Lord: for although sense sug­gest B the contrarie, yet let Faith confirme thee, iudging not of the thing by tast, but indubitably, and with full Faith beleeue that thou art made partaker of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ. And againe know this, and with full cer­titude beleeue, That the Bread seene is not Bread, though it so seeme to the tast, but the Bodie of Christ; and that Wine seene is not Wine, though tast iudge it to be so, but the Bloud of Christ. C

ANSWER.

First, the Fathers teach, and we with them acknowledge, that Christs bodie is mystically present to faithfull communi­cants, 1. Cor. 10.16. But corporall presence (by indistance of place, and absence of the materiall substance of the elements) was not taught by the antiēt Church; for they teach, That the creatures Iren. li. 4. cap. 32. Eum quiex cre­atura Panis est ac­cepit, & gratias e­git, dicens hoc est corpus meum. Et calicē similitèr, qui est ex creatura. Ib. li. 4. ca. 34. Quem­admodum qui est è terra panis percipi­ens vocationē Dei, iam non communis panis est, sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena & coelesti, &c. li. 5. ca. 1. Eum Ca­licem qui est creatura, &c. of Bread and Wine are present in the Eucharist, and that after they be changed Iustin. Martyr. Apol. 2. Quae mutata nutrit carnes nostras. Cyril. in Ioh. li. 3. c. 34. Vt panis hic terrestris facit, imbecilitatem carnis nostrae sustinens atquè conseruans: ità & ipse per spiritum san­ctum, spiritum nostrum viuificat, & corpus ipsum à coruptione liberat., they nourish the bodie: but the D abstracted shapes of Bread and Wine are not Gods creatures, but Popish fancies. Againe, they teach, that such signes and ele­ments are present, as haue power to feed and nourish the bo­die Iren. li. 5. ca. 1. Et per creaturam E nutrimur, ex quibus augetur carnis nostiae substantia., and to resemble the mysticall vnion betweene Christ and Christian people, to wit, Bread confected of many cornes of graine, Wine of many grapes Cyprian. Epist. 63. Quemadmodum grana multa in vnum collecta, &c. Idem. Epist. 76. Quando Dominus corpus suum panem vocat, de multorum granorum adu­natione congestum populum nostrum quem portabat indicat adunatum: Et quando sanguinem suum vinum ap­pellat, de botris atquè acinis plurimis expressum, at (que) in vnum coactum, gregem item nostrum significat commix­tione adunatae multitudinis copulatum. Chrys. in 1. Cor. hom. 24. Quemadmodum panis ex multis granis vnitur, &c. Aug. in Ioh. tr. 26. Dominus noster Iesus Christus corpus & sanguinem suum in [...] rebus commendauit, quae ad vnum aliquid rediguntur ex multis. Namquè aliud in vnum ex multis granis conficitur & constat, [...] in vnum ex multis [...] confluit.: but mathematicall Bread [Page 430] and wine, haue neither power to nourish, neither doe they re­semble A the mysticall Vnion aforesaid; for there is in them, onely the shadow of graine and Grapes, but no substance; and Papists may as well say, That painted bread and wine, haue power of feeding, and mysticall representation, as these ficti­ons and Mathematicall shadowes.

Secondly, Cyrill sheweth in other passages of that worke, what hee intendeth and meaneth, namely, That the conse­crate bread, is not [...], common, prophane, and meere naturall bread, which the sight and taste iudge so to be; but sanctified, eleuated, and changed to supernaturall vse B and operation.

Thirdly, If Theophylact, a late Writer Bellarm. de [...]. Theophi­lactus [...] tempore A­lexandri Papae 2. &c. Circa annum Dom. 1071., and some one or two besides, speake obscurely, and improperly Chrysost. in Ioh. Hom. 45. Non se tantum videri permittit desiderantibus, sed & tangi, & [...], & dentes carni suae infigi. Id. Ad Pop. Antioch. Hom. 61. Lingua [...]. in this Argu­ment, what is this to the grounding and raysing of an Article of Faith, or to the proouing a matter in question, by a common and euident consent of Fathers?

Fourthly, The Fathers exhort people to abnegate their C sences in Baptisme, wherein they maintaine no Transubstan­tiation: and there is good reason why wee should doe this in the holy Eucharist, because wee therein eate the flesh, and drinke the blood of the Sonne of man, Credendo Chrysost. 1. Cor. Hom. 24. August. d. verb. Dom. Serm. 33. & sup. Ioh. Tract. 25. Ib. tr. 50. Tertul. d. Resur. Car. cap. 37., by belee­uing, Iohn 6. 35. and not by sensible or corporall eating.

IESVIT. D

Finally, That the Fathers held Transubstantiation, is prooued by the continuancie which they taught of Christs bodie in the Sacrament, so long as the accidents of bread last, as appeareth by their reseruing of the same. For Re­seruation to haue beene the custome of the Primatiue Church, Protestants grant. That the Sacrament was of some reserued in the elder dayes of the Church, is not (saith Master Habent vete­ris Ecclesiae exem­plum [...]. Caluin. Instit. lib. 9. c. 17. Sect. 39. Fulke against Heskins Saunders, & p. 77. Chemnit. in Exam. Concil. Trid. pa. 2. p. 102. Iustin. Apolog. 2. fine Dionys. Alexand. Ep. ad Fab. apud Euseb. Ep. 6. ca. 36. Chrys. Ep. 1. ad Innocent. Tertullian. li. 2. ad vxorem Greg. Nazian. Orat. in Gorgon. Fulke) so great a question, as whether it E [Page 431] ought to be reserued. And Chemnicius granteth, that in A this point on our side stands, [...] consuetudinis late patentis & diu propagatae. And whereas [...] ad­deth, Haec tamen veritati praescribere non debet, hee accuseth the Primitiue Church, and opposeth no lesse against them than vs; and I am sure your Maiestie knowes, that the Primitiue Fathers did vse to send the Sacrament vn­to them that were lawfully absent from Church, as doth witnes S. Iustin; and vnto the sicke, as Dyonisius Alex. B writes of Serapion, That Christians carryed the same to their priuate houses to take in the morning before other meate, as testifieth Tertullian, That many times they did weare the same about them for protection, as Sa­tyrus brother to S. Ambr. going to sea, carryed it in a Ambros. Orat. in Obitu. Fratris Sa­tyri. stole, by vertue whereof he was saued in shipwracke: That Martyrs had the same frequently with them, to re­ceiue Symeon. Metaphr. vitae Sancti Steph. Pap. & Martyr. c. 17. Vsu Ord. in Martyrol. Guismundus de corpore & sangui­ne li. 2. Cyprian. Serm. de lapsis. it for their Viaticum, as Tharsilius a most glorious C Martyr, who being taken with the Sacrament about him, permitted himselfe rather to bee bruised with stones to death, than disclose it to the Persecutors; who when they had crowned the Martyr, searching seriously for the Sa­crament in his cloathes and about his dead body, found no­thing, God by miracle keeping the same out of their impi­ous hands. S. Cyprian records diuers miracles done in confirmation of this our Sauiours permanent presence in D the Sacrament, namely of a woman vnworthily approach­ing to the Chest where the same was kept, that was frigh­ted backe with fire that thence flashed out, Tanta est Domini potentia, saith S. Cyprian, Tanta Maiestas. And so fully were they persuaded in this opinion, That Christs body is permanently in the Sacrament, that Cyril Cyril. Alexand. E­pist. ad Calosyr. dareth say, Insaniant qui dicunt benedictionem a San­ctificatione cessare, Si quae reliquiae remanserunt E eius in sequentem diem, non enim mutabitur sacro­sanctum corpus Christi, sed virtus benedictionis & viuificatiua gratia iugis in eo est Now what rea­son could the Fathers haue, thus constantly to defend this [Page 432] continuancy of our Sauiour in the Sacrament, but that A they beleeued Bread to be changed into his body, remaining demonstrable, by the formes and accidences thereof, so long as they remained entire, and were not changed into the ac­cidences of some other substance?

ANSWER.

Your obiection reduced to forme of argument is:

All they which vsed reseruation of the Sacrament, and B maintained continuancie of Christs body therein, beleeued Transubstantiation.

The antient Fathers vsed reseruation of the Sacrament, and maintained continuancie of Christs body therein, Ergo

The ancient Fathers beleeued Transubstantiation.

If the argument be thus formed, First, the Maior Propo­sition C is denyed: for the Fathers might vse reseruation of the Sacrament, and beleeue the permanencie of Christs body therein, vpon the Tenet of reall Presence by Consubstantiati­on, and not vpon beleefe of Transubstantiation.

Secondly, the Primitiue Church, and antient Fathers, gene­rally or vniuersally, vsed not reseruation of the Sacramentall signes Origen. vel Cyril. in Leuit. Hom. 5. Dominus panem quem dis­cipulis dabat, non distulit nec serua­uit in crastinum, &c. Hesich. in Le­uit. li. 2. c. 8. Quic­quid reliquum fu­erit de carne & pa­nibus, ignis absu­met, &c. quod nunc videmus [...] in Ecclesia sen­sibiliter fieri, igni­que tradi quaecun­que remanere con­tingerit inconsumpta. Niceph. Eccles. Hist. li. 17. ca. 25. [...]. Eccles. Hist. li. 4. c. 35. Concil. Matiscon. 2. can. E 6. Humbert. c. lib. Nicetae apud Cassand. Liturg. c 30. pa. 69.; and Iustin Martyr Iustin. Apol. 2., and Ireneus Iren. ap. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. li. 5. c. 24., speake onely of the sending of the Sacrament from the Church, where it was ad­ministred to sick persons and strangers. Some examples of re­seruation proceeded vpon the ignorance, and superstition of D priuate persons Vide Cyprian. li. d. lapsis., in which case although some Fathers vsed conniuence, yet these abuses were afterwards reformed Toletan. Concil. 1. ca. 14. Caesar [...]. Concil. 1. cap. 3.. The Minor therefore if it be generall, is denyed: and if it be par­ticular, then the Maior and Minor inferre not the conclusion; because that which was done by some, vpon priuate opinion, and in another kind or manner than Romists doe at this day, and was also opposed and corrected by others, cannot be a mat­ter of Catholike doctrine, or practise.

But this question of Reseruation hath beene largely handled [Page 433] by many of our part, and whatsoeuer Romists haue obiected A concerning the same, is fully answered Read Chemni­tius, Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 2. pag. 97. Doct. Fulk. ag. Hes­kins Parliam. p. 78. Gerhard. loc. Com. to. 5. d. Sacra. Coen. ca. 17. Politian. So­phist. Bellarm. d. permanentia Corp. Christi, pag. 44. &c. Froeresen. Scrutin. Panopliae. Bellarm. d. Euchar. Disp. 9. Herbrand. Disp. 32. d. Fest. Corp. Christi, pag. 550.: and therefore, be­cause this Iesuit produceth no new matter, but onely repeateth what wee haue formerly confuted, and especially because Re­seruation concludeth not Transubstantiation, which is the mat­ter now in question, I forbeare further examination of the par­ticular Testimonies produced by him.

IESVIT. B

Against this consent of Fathers, Protestants obiect the Testimonie of Theodoret and Gelasius, who in plaine tearmes affirme, That the substance of Bread and Wine remaines in this holy Eucharist, bringing this as an exam­ple of the Incarnation, where the Natures of God and man remaine in Christ: Signa mystica (saith Theodoret) Theodoret. Dial. Inconfusus. post sanctificationem non recedunt à sua natura. And C Gelasius, Non esse desinit substantia vel natura Panis Gelasius, d. duabus naturis aduers. Eu­tichet. & Vini: I answer, That these Fathers, by the substance of Bread and Wine, vnderstand the naturall qualities that flow from the nature and essence of Bread and Wine; for ordinarily, and in common speech, the naturall accidents and proprieties of a thing are tearmed the nature of the thing. Thus wee say, That to be heauie, and to fall downe­ward, is the nature of the Stone; to be hot, and to burne, D is the nature of the Fire, which yet are but naturall quali­ties and properties of Stone and Fire. By this, or rather by a more strange manner of speech, S. Theodote, Bishop Hom. d. Natiu. Sai­uatoris, in Concil-Eph. pa. 3. c. 9. of Ancyra, to explicate against Nestorius and Eutyches the coniunction of two Natures in one Person, by the ex­ample of the Water that Moses conuerted into Bloud, saith, That the Water was not changed in nature, nor did cease to be Water; which in rigor of speech, taking the nature of Water for the substance thereof, as condistinct from the E naturall qualities, is not true. But because Water changed into Bloud, remaines, according to some naturall qualities and properties which it hath common with Bloud, as Moi­sture, [Page 434] Liquidnesse, and the like; he the better to sit and ac­commodate A the similitude, saith, The Water remained accor­ding to the nature, that is, according to some naturall quali­ties thereof. For these Fathers bring those similitudes, to declare the Mysterie of the Incarnation against the Heresie of Eutyches, who denied the naturall qualities and proper­ties of the two Natures of God and man to remaine distinct in the Person of Christ: which Error they reiected, by the example of the Eucharist, where the naturall qualities of B Bread remaine together with the Bodie of Christ in the same Sacrament. Which naturall qualities of Bread, they tearme the nature of Bread (as in some sense they may be tearmed) to the end, that the phrase of two distinct Natures remaining, might seem common to the Mysteries of both the Incarnation and Eucharist, and so the similitude seeme more fit and proper; though the Fathers knew well, that the phrase did not agree to both Mysteries equally in the same sense. Which obscure vttering his mind, is the lesse to be C wondered at in Theodoret, because he doth professe in that place, not to speake plainely, as fearing that some Infidels or Catechumes were present, to whom the Mysterie of Tran­substantiation was not to be reuealed Non oportet (saith hee) aperte dicere est, enim veresimile adesse aliquos non initiatos.

Much lesse cause haue they to stand vpon the words of S. Augustine, Quod videtur in Altari panis est, quod D etiam occuli renunciant. Quod autem fides postulat panis est corpus Christi: For the sense is, That conse­crated Bread is Bread in outward apparance, and the na­turall Accidences of Bread truly remaine, as the eye doth witnesse; but inwardly, and according to the substance, it is not Bread, but the Bodie of Christ, as Faith requireth we beleeue. And it is to be noted, that these words are not extant in the workes of S. Augustine, but alledged by E venerable Bede, a follower of S. Augustines Doctrine; and so it is not likely they are to be vnderstood, but as Bede vnderstood them, who sets downe his mind in these [Page 435] words: The forme of Bread is seene, but the substance A Beda de Mysterio Missae, apud Thom. Waldens. to. 2. c. 8. 2. of Bread is not there, nor any other Bread, but onely that Bread which came downe from Heauen.

ANSVVER.

Demonstration hath largely beene made by our part, that none of the antient Fathers maintained Romish Transubstan­tiation: and I haue not obserued one expresse Testimonie, pro­duced by Romists, wherein the Primatiue Fathers, nay, where B Damascene [...]. d. fid. lib. 4. ca. 14. Quem­ad. naturaliter pa­nis per comestio­nem, & vinum per potum transmuta­tur in [...] & [...] come­dentis: ita per in­uocationem & ad­uentum Sp. Sancti, substantia panis, & vini supernaturaliter transit in corpus & sanguinem Christi. Now from hence Durand [...], Est autem manifestum, panis materiam manere in [...] per mutationem na­turalem, C Ergo, similiter in conuersione supernaturali, panis & vini [...] manet cum corpore Christi. Theoph. sup. [...]. 6. or Theophilact affirme, That the whole materiall substance, and forme essentiall of bread and wine being de­stroyed, the bare accidents and quantitie of bread and wine re­maine; or that the abstracted figures and qualities of those crea­tures, are receiued into the mouth and stomacke, and are tasted, felt, and conferre nourishment, without any earthly matter conioyned to them.

But on the contrarie, many Fathers affirme, That after con­secration, bread and wine remaine. Theoderet Theod. Dial. 2. cap. 24. Nequa­quam enim post [...] my­stica symbola [...] fi­guram, [...]. Manent [...] in priore substantia & [...] & specie: [...], &c. saith, That they lose not their proper nature, but remaine after they are sanctified, in their former essence, figure, and kinde. Gelasius Gelas. c. Eu­tich. & [...]. Bi­blioth. [...] to. 4. pa. 565. saith, Esse non desinit substantia, vel natura panis & vini, The substance or na­ture of bread and wine ceaseth not to bee. Bertram Bertram. d. corp. & sang. Dom. pa. 38. saith, Secundam creaturarum substantiam, quod fuerunt ante consecratio­nem hoc & postea consistunt? According to the substance of crea­tures, D they persist the same before and after consecration. Ire­neus Iren. lib. 4. cap. 34. teacheth, That bread which is from the earth, receiuing di­uine calling or sanctification, is not common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two seuerall things, or matters, one earthly, and the o­ther coelestiall. Saint Chrysostome Chrysost. ad Ca [...]. [...]. Sicut ante quam [...], panem [...] autem il­lum [...] gratia mediante Sacerdote, liberatus [...] ab appellatione panis, dignus autem ha­bitus est dominici corporis appellatione, [...] panis in ipso permansit, &c., Before Sanctification wee call it bread onely, but when diuine Grace hath sanctified it, it is deliue­red from the name of bread, and is counted worthie of the Appellation of the Lords bodie, although the nature of bread remaine in it still. Damascene [...]. Orth. Fid. lib. 4. cap. 14. saith, As a fierie coale, is wood and fire, so the E bread of the holy Communion, is not onely bread, [...], [Page 436] but bread vnited to the Diuinitie, [...]. But it is appa­rent, A that when fire is vnited to a coale, that the materiall substance of wood remaineth, at least in part.

The Aduersarie, in answere to Theoderit and Gelasius, preten­deth that these Fathers, by the words, Substance, Nature, and Kind, vnderstand onely the naturall qualities and accidents which flow from the Nature and Essence of Bread and Wine, and he yeeldeth a reason, saying, That in ordinarie speech, the naturall properties and qualities of things, are tearmed, the na­ture of the thing, &c.

But this Answere is insufficient, because it might perhaps B salue the Obiection grounded vpon the word Nature; but the Fathers affirme also, that the Sacramentall signes remaine in their essence, substance, and kinde; and they adde farther, that they may bee sensibly tasted and felt Theod. Dial. 2. cap. 24. [...]., and haue force of nourishing the bodie, and that they are compounded of many cornes, and of many grapes Jren. lib. 5. c. 1. Justin. Apol. 2. Cy­prian. Epist. 63. & 76. Chrys. 1. Cor. Hom. 24. Cyril. in Ioh. lib. 3. cap. 34. Aug. in Ioh. tr. 26., which make one substan­tiall bodie of bread and wine. Now these things cannot true­ly bee said of the naked shapes and accidents of bread and wine, suspended and diuided from their materiall substance. Besides, the Fathers Theod. Dial. 1. cap. 8. & 2. cap. 24. Gelasius li. c. Nestor. & Eutich. deliuer the foresaid Doctrine, to prooue C the veritie and distinction of the two substantiall natures in Christ, by making a comparison betweene the holy Eucha­rist, and the two natures in Christs Person; but if the sub­stance of bread and wine cease, and are changed into the very bodie and blood of Christ, then the former comparison would rather confirme the false beleefe of the Hereticke, than main­taine the Orthodoxall Faith of Christs humanitie, remaining euen after his Ascension: for the Hereticke might inferre vpon the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, two errours about the hu­mane nature of Christ. D

First, That as in the Eucharist there is onely the outward Theod. Dialogo 2. [...]. shape and forme of bread, and not the reall substance: euen so in Christ, there was the shape and forme of flesh, but not the verie nature.

Secondly, Euen as in the Eucharist, the essentiall forme and materiall substance of bread and wine are swallowed vp and conuerted into the bodie and blood of Christ; so likewise af­ter Christs Ascension, the humane nature is absorpt, and con­uerted into the Deitie. E

IESVIT. § 4. A The seeming repugnancies this Mysterie hath with sence, should incline Christians the sooner to beleeue it.

THe former proofe of Transubstantiation might sa­tisfie, were this Mysterie easie, and not accom­panied with many seeming absurdities and repug­nances B against sense, [...] these foure.

First, That a bodie as big as our Sauiours, remayning still truely corpulent in it selfe, should be contained with­in the compasse of a round Hoast, scarce an inch long and broad.

Secondly, That a bodie so glorious should be combined vnto corruptible elements, and so made subiect vnto the indignities and obscenities that may befall vnto them. C

Thirdly, That the same bodie may be in heauen, and on earth in innumerable places at once.

Fourthly, That the substance of bread being conuerted into Christs bodie, the sole accidents remaine by themselues, performing the whole office of substance, no lesse than if it were present, euen to the nutrition of mans bodie.

These difficulties so scandalize Protestants, that some condemne Transubstantiation, as impossible: yea, as absurd, D ridiculous, barbarous; others professe they cannot subdue Field, of the Church, lib. 3. their vnderstandings to beleeue it as a [...] of Faith.

To giue full satisfaction in this point, I set downe this Proposition; That these seeming absurdities should not a­uert, but rather incline a true Christian minde to beleeue this Mysterie. In proofe whereof, I present vnto your Maiestie these three Considerations. E

ANSVVER.

WEe measure not supernaturall Doctrine, by humane sence or reason; neither can any seeming repug­nances of reputed Philosophie, to Diuine Reuela­tion [Page 438] hinder our Faith, where the holy Ghost commaunds vs A to beleeue Chrys. in 2. Tim. ca. 1. ho. 2. [...] August. d. Temp. ser. 147. Si argumenta [...] diffi­cilè soluimus, illud quod demonstratū est in Domino sinè difficultate fidei te­neamus, illi garriant, nos credamus. Idem. d. Ciuit Dei, lib. 12. ca. 17., as appeareth in the articles of the sacred Trini­tie, Incarnation, Resurrection, &c. Est quidem de communibus sen­sibus sapere in Dei rebus, sed in testimonium veri, non in adiutori­um falsi, quod sit secundum diuinam, non contrà diuinam dispositi­onem, saith Tertullian Tertull. d. Resur. car. cap. 3. Hieron. Proaem. in Dan. Hilar. d. Trinit. lib. 1. Respuit captiosas & inutiles Philosophiae quaestiones fides constans, nequè humanarum ineptiarum fallacijs succumbens, spolium se praebet veritas falsitati. Aug. d. Trinit. lib. 1. cap. 1. Fidei contemnentes initium, immaturo & peruerso rationis amore falluntur. Idem. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 18. cap. 40. Aug. d. Doctrin. Chrst. lib. 2. cap. 18., We must haue vnderstanding in the things of God out of common sence, but this must serue to testifie truth, and not to patronise errour, according to diuine disposition (Reuelation) not against it. So farre as sence and reason are not repugnant to diuine veritie, but subseruient, we may giue credit to them, and euerie good Christian (saith S. B Augustine) Vbicunque inuenerit veritatem, Domini sui intelligat esse, Wheresoeuer he findeth veritie (taught either by nature or grace) must vnderstand, that it is his masters.

The question betweene the Romists and vs is not, Whether if Transubstantiatiō be reuealed by God, we may notwithstan­ding C therefore refuse to beleeue it, because the matter is diffi­cill to be conceiued, or because it hath manie seeming repug­nances to sence; for if they be able to demonstrate the first, we must renounce the latter: But the question is, Whether Transubstantiation, hauing no certaine and manifest ground in diuine Reuelation, and many repugnances to common sence and reason; and besides, being expressely repugnant to the let­ter of the Scripture, we are to beleeue the same?

First, the holy Scripture calleth consecrated Wine, the fruit of the Vine; and consecrated Bread, by the name of verie D Bread, Luc. 22.18.1. Cor. 10.16. & 11.26.27.28.

Secondly, the same affirmeth not that the substance of Bread and Wine is abolished.

Thirdly, naturall reason sheweth, that accidents must haue a subiect of inhaerencie, and that bare formes and shadowes of things cannot nourish without corporall substance.

Fourthly, the sences of Tast and Feeling discerne apparantly a corporietie in the elements receiued. In this case there is no reason to imagine that our sences are deluded, or that God almightie by miracle worketh in a contrarie manner, to the E course of nature, and to that which he hath otherwise reuea­led in his word.

It is not sufficient for Romists to affirme, That God vseth a miraculous course in these things; and to palliate absurdities, re­pugnant [Page 439] to sence, reason, and scripture, vnder pretext of Gods A omnipotencie: but they must prooue by diuine Reuelation, that he will doe this, for God effecteth not all things by his omnipotencie, which men may imagine to be possible. In the wordes of our Sauiour, This is my Bodie, This cuppe is the new Testament in my Bloud, &c. there is not a sillable concerning ac­cidents without a subiect, or concerning any miracle wrought in the Sacrament by omnipotencie, neither is there any such doctrine elsewhere reuealed. And if Christs words be expoun­ded figuratiuely according to S. Augustine Aug. in Psa. 3. Idem. d. Doctr. Chr. lib. 3. cap. 16. Idem. in Leuit. q. 57. Idem c. Adimant. cap. 12., Tertullian Tertull. cont. Marc., Theo­derit Theod. [...]. 1., Origen Orig. c. [...]. Dial. 3. d. [...], hom. pa. 552., Bertram Bertram. d. Corp. & San. Dom. [...]. sup. Mat. 26. ca. 65. pa. 305., &c. they make nothing for corpo­rall B presence by indistance of place: and if they be vnderstood literally, they prooue not Transubstantiation; for Bread may be called the bodie of Christ by an inusitate forme of spea­king Busherus. Ex­ercit. d. Eucha. pars 2. Sect. 2. Inusitata praedicatio est in qua duae res dispa­ratae vocibus pro­prijs affirmate [...] vnum (que) di­citur [...], prop­tèr arctissimam cō ­iunctionem & rea­lem, [...] ad [...] praesentiā., which according to the Tenet of some learned Di­uines Melanchton. Chemnicius. is no trope or figure. And if neither of these exposi­tions content our Aduersaries, they might haue beleeued the words of the holy Text as they sound literally, and a reall presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud wrought by the power of the holy Ghost, without defining and determining the ex­presse manner how. For if they beleeue that accidents subsist C without a substance, and nourish, and are tasted, and felt, and passe into the stomach Innocent. 3. Myst. Miss. lib. 4. cap. 9. Post consecrationem accidens est sinè subiecto, quià existit [...] per se. Transit enim substantia, sed remanent accidentia: nec dicitur accidens in [...] participij, sed accipiendum est in vi nominis. Non solum accidientales verum etiàm naturales proprietates remanere videntur vt paneitas quae satu­rando famem expellit, & vinitas quae satiando sitim extinguit., and yet are not able to expresse the di­stinct manner how: and if they beleeue a substantiall presence of Christs indiuiduall humane bodie in many hosts, and yet are vnable to declare the maner how Ibid. ca. 8. Verum an partes in partes, & [...] transeat in totale, nouit ille qui facit. Ego quod [...] est, igni comburo: nam credere iubemur discutere prohibemur. Ibid. Licet corpus Dominicum sit in loco locale, quaeritur tamèn vtrum in Sacramento sit locatum localitèr, id est vtrum faciat localem distantiam, & an habeat localem situm, vt dici debeat quià sedet, iacet, aut [...], sed & [...] multa circà praesentem articulum possunt inquiri, quae melius est intacta relinquere, quam teme­re definite, nàm bestia qua tetigerit montem lapidabitur. Ibid. cap. 12. Ego, diuina Sacramenta magis veneran­da quam discutienda profiteor. Ibid. cap. 16. Si quaeratur vtrum [...] localitèr [...] de Coelo, vel ascen­dat in Coelum, cum exhibet [...] praesentiam corporalem an alitèr incipiat vel [...] esse [...] specie [...]. Respondeo non oportere nos in talibus curiosos existere, ne plus quam possumus praesumamus, & non [...], salubre concilium dedit Apostolus, Noli plus sapere quam [...], &c. Ego nescio quomo­do Christus accedit, sed & quomodo recedit ignoro, nouit ille qui nihil ignorat.; Why might they not haue suspended other questions concerning the distinct manner of presence, and maintained onely a true and mysticall presence, the distinct manner whereof is incomprehensible in this life, and not haue disturbed the peace of the Church by defining as an article of Faith, such a doctrine as hath no foundation in D diuine Reuelation, to make it appeare certaine and infallible? E

IESVITS 1. Consideration. A

The first is grounded vpon the supposall of two things most certaine. First, that the Primitiue Church preaching vnto Pagans, Iewes, and other Infidels, the rest of Christian mysteries, as the Trinitie, the Incarnation, the Resurrection of the bodie, did most carefully keepe as much as might be from their knowledge, the mysteries of the Eucharist; yea Catechumens and Nouices were not, before B Baptisme, fully taught or instructed therein. Secondly, the reason moouing the Primitiue Church to be carefull in this point, was, least Catechumens and Infidels being fully acquainted with the whole mysterie, the one should be scandalized, and the other mocke thereat. Hence it was accounted such a haynous offence, that Christians should discouer this secret vnto Infidels, or dispute about the difficulties thereof, in their presence. The Councell of Alex­andria, C Concil. Alexan. a­pud Athanasium, Apolog. 2. relating the crimes of Arians, number this as one of the greatest, They were not ashamed in publique, and as it were vpon a scaffold, to treat of the mysteries be­fore Catechumens, and which is worse, before Pagans. And a little after, Jt is not lawfull to publish the Mysteries be­fore them that are not initiated, for feare least Pagans out of ignorance mocke, and Catechumens entring into cu­riosities, be scandalized. And againe, Before Catechumens, D and which is more, before Iewes and Pagans, blasphe­ming Christianitie, they handled a question about the Epist. Iulij apud A­thanas. Apol 2. Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour. S. Ambrose saith, To declare the mysteries vnto them that be Catechumens, is not Tradition but Prodition: seeing by such declarations danger is incurred, least they be diuulged vnto Jnfidels that will scoffe at them. This supposed, I infer that the seeming absur dities of the Catholique reall presence should E incourage a true Christian mind to beleeue it: for a true Christian desires to beleeue, and firmely cleaue vnto the reall presence that was beleeued by the Primitiue Church. But this was a reall presence, accompanied with many (so [Page 441] seemingly grosse) absurdities, that the Church had no hope A to satisfie Infidels therein, or to keepe them from blasphe­ming, but by concealing the mysterie from them; and conse­quently they held the Catholique not the Protestant Do­ctrine in this point. The Protestant Doctrine that makes Christs bodie present spiritually by Faith vnto the deuout Receiuer, that communicating, thinks sweetly of Christs passion and death, containes no mysterie to be concealed, in respect of the seeming absurdities. B

ANSWER.

In the daies of the Fathers, Heathens, Iewes, and Heretickes might enter into the Church, and heare the publicke Sermons, and preaching, as appeareth by the fourth councell of Car­thage Concil. Carth. 4. cap. 84. Episcopus nullum prohibeat ingredi in Ecclesiā, & audire verbum Dei siuè Gentilem, siuè Iudaeum, siuè Haereticum, vs (que) ad Missam Catechu­minotum, d. Conse­crat. Dist. 1. ca. 67. Durant. d. Rit. Eccl. Cath. li. 2. ca. 1. n. 2., and Infidels might read the bookes and tractates of the Fathers: But the Fathers in their sermons to the people, and also in their written bookes, deliuered the Doctrine of the holy mysteries, as appeareth by Ireneus, Iustin Martyr, S. Cyprian, C Gregorie Nissen, Cyrill of Hierusalem, S. Chrysostome, S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, &c. Neither is it apparant that the said Fathers taught any other secret Doctrine, touching the holy mysteries, than such as they preached in their Homilies, and penned in their Bookes: and therefore these Homilies and Bookes be­ing publique, it appeareth not, that the Primitiue Church was more carefull to conceale the Doctrine of the Eucharist than of Baptisme, or of the Trinitie.

The Obiections out of Athanasius and S. Ambrose, shew that it was held vnlawfull in those ages to treat or dispute of the D holy Eucharist intempestiuè, that is, before Heathens which were not at all instructed in the first Principles of Religion; or to treat of this Doctrine in prophane places or auditories. But what is this to Transubstantiation? For it was held vnlawfull in the Primitiue Church, in maner aforesaid, that is, in an vndue time, order, & place, to treat or dispute of the mysteries of Bap­tisme, or of other profound mysteries belonging to Christian faith Dionis. Hie­rarch. ca. 1. Obserua diligentius, ne sancta sanctorum esseras, nec prophanis luminibus violanda [...], verum reuereber is magis. [...], &c. [...]; Dei mysteria, mysteria spi­ritatibus, E [...] honorabis, atquè intemerata seruabis, nequè ea passim [...] trades, sed san­ctis solis, sanctarum rerum intelligentias sacratius pandens. Ib. lpsi quoquè sanctissimi principes nostridum sacra publicè agenda [...], non [...] & patulis [...] sed [...] augustioribus tradiderunt. Ib. ca. 2. d. Bap­tismo. Nullus qui rudimentis [...] careat, pergat ad videndum: Nam nequè infirmis pupillis, aduersam solaribus [...] intendere tutum est.. Also if it were granted that some antient Fathers be­leeuing [Page 442] a reall Presence, did therefore conceale the doctrine of A the holy Eucharist, Ratione scandali, because of offence of Infi­dels, arising vpon many difficulties and seeming contradictions to sence and common reason, it followeth not from hence, that those Fathers beleeued Popish Transubstantiation, for many difficulties and repugnances to sence and common reason, are found in Consubstantiation, as well as in Transubstantiation, and sundrie places of the Fathers, may with more probabilitie be alleadged in fauour of reall Presence by Consubstantiation, than for Transubstantiation.

Lastly, The mysticall vnion betweene Christ and his mem­bers, B is ineffable, and the manner incomprehensible: and the Protestant Doctrine teaching a reall donation of the bodie and blood of Christ, and a mysticall coniunction by the operation of the holy Ghost, with the soules of faithfull Receiuers; and that dead and corruptible creatures, can be a meanes and instru­ment heereof, is a great mysterie of godlinesse, incredible to prophane persons: and therefore the Primitiue Church, which beleeued this Doctrine, might iustly require, that this Mysterie should not be manifested before Infidels and other infirme Christians, vntill they were first instructed in the rudiments of C Christianitie.

IESVIT.

Yea, the Fathers did not feare to declare vnto Catechu­mens this Sacrament, so farre as it was commemoratiue of Christ and his Passion, as appeareth by the Treatises of Saint Augustine vpon Saint Iohn, made before Cate­chumens; out of which Treatises, Protestants, for their D meere commemoratiue presence, alleadge many Sentences to little purpose. For he there explicates spirituall manduca­tion by Faith, and he excludes the grosse imagination of ea­ting Christs bodie in his proper shape, tearing it in pieces with the tooth; but denies not, yea rather insinuates ano­ther kind of spirituall manducation, not onely by Faith, but by reall sumption, though to conceale the Mysterie from Catechumens, he speakes not so clearely thereof. Where­fore E as the Palme tree, the heauier the waight is that is laid vpon it, the more it riseth vpwards, as it were ioying in difficulties: so a true Catholicke Christian, feeling in [Page 443] the doctrine of Transubstantiation, many seeming ab­surdities, A that presse carnall imagination to the ground, groweth thereby more strong to beleeue it, imbracing these difficulties as manifest signes that this doctrine was be­leeued by the Primitiue Apostolicall Church. On the other side, Protestants finding the Presence of Christs body by Faith to be deuoyd of such difficulties, may by the very lightnesse thereof suspect it is not the doctrine which the Fathers concealed from Jnfidells, as more absurd to hu­mane B Imagination than any other mystery of Christian Religion.

ANSWER.

You obiect, that the Fathers declared to Catechumens, that is, to Nouices in Christianitie, a commemoratiue presence in the holy Eucharist, but not a corporall presence by Transubstan­tiation: and from hence you would inferre, that the Fathers held two kinds of Presences of Christs body and bloud in the C Eucharist, the one soly spirituall, by intellectuall apprehension, the other corporall, by reall sumption of Christs body into the mouth and stomacke of the receiuer, and you pretend; that S. Augustine was of this iudgement.

But you must remember, that you are not now to deale with Aduersaries which will credite your bare words, and proofes you haue none. Therefore I answer, First, that the Fathers taught no other kind of Presence, to them which were bapti­sed, and receiued the holy Eucharist, than to Catechumens or vnbaptised Christians, although they instructed the one sort D more fully than the other. Secondly, S. Augustine teacheth not, that Christs body is receiued inuisibly, insensibly, and accor­ding to the nature of a spirit, by the mouth and stomacke of each Communicant: but he teacheth onely two kinds of manduca­tion in the Sacrament; one, both corporall and spirituall, wherein the body of man receiueth the externall elements of Bread and Wine, and the soule receiueth the true body and bloud of Christ by faith Aug. in Ioh. tr. 26. Visibilem ci­bum spiritualiter intellexerunt, spi­ritualiter esurie­runt, spiritualiter gustauerunt, vt spiritualiter [...]: Nam & nos hodie [...] visibilem cibum, sed aliud est Sacramentum, aliud est virtus Sacramenti.; the other corporeall onely, where­in the receiuer partaketh the outward signe, and not the thing signified, Panem Domini, non panem Dominum Ib. tr. 27. Res ipsa [...] est Sacramentum, omni [...] ad vitam, nulli ad exitium, quicunque eius particeps fuerit., the visible Sa­crament E [Page 444] of Christs body Aug Sup. Ioh. tr. 26. Hoc est man­ducare illam escā, & illum bibere [...], in Christo manere & illum manentem in se habere. Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, & in quo non manet Chri­stus, procul dubio nec manducat spi­ritualiter carnem [...], nec bibit eius sanguinem, licet carnaliter & visi­biliter premat dē ­tibus Sacramen­tum corporis & sanguinis Christi, sed magis tantae rei Sacramentum ad [...] sibi manducat & bibit. Ibid. [...]. 27. Non ita est in hac esca, quam sustentandae huius corporis vitae causa sumimus, nam qui eam non sumpserit non vi­uet. Nec tamen qui eam sumpserit [...]. Fieri enim potest vt senio vel morbo, vel aliquo casu plurimi & qui eam sumpserint moriantur: in hoc vero cibo & potu, id est corpore & sanguine Domini, non ita est. Nam & qui eam non sumit, non habet vitam, & qui eam sumit, habet vitam & hanc [...]. Ibid. Vt quisquam viuat propter me, participatio facit, qua manducatum, &c., but not his very body: and he af­firmeth A not vpon the sixt chapter of S. Iohn, That a malicious sinner, continuing such, receiueth the very body and blood of Christ. Thirdly, Protestants beleeue not onely a commemo­ratiue, but also an exhibitiue presence of the thing signified, together with the outward signe, according to the manner for­merly declared, pag. 405. and this Presence is mysticall, and such as may seeme incredible to vnbelceuers, because of sun­dry difficulties, repugnant to common sence, to wit, That Christs flesh, by the vnspeakeable power of the holy Ghost, should be after a sort incorporated into the soule, and that cor­ruptible B and dead creatures should be eleuated, and made ef­fectuall instruments to apply and communicate Iesus Christ, and the vertue of his death to faithfull Communicants.

IESVITS 2. Consideration. C

This consideration is drawne from the qualitie of the difficulties obiected against this Mysterie, which be such, as a Christian in honour should neglect them. For if it be the part of a prudent and intelligent man, not to permit Ima­gination to preuaile against his Reason; What a disgrace is it for a Christian, that his faith should be conquered by these kind of difficulties? For, that the seeming absurdi­ties D of this misterie be not in respect of naturall Reason, but meerely of Jmagination, may hence appeare, that some naturall truths be in a manner as difficile and in­credible, which will be seene if we compare the foure aboue mentioned difficulties, with the difficulties some truths (euident in nature) haue.

ANSWER. E

When difficulties obiected arise from experience of sence, and principles of nature, and there is no expresse or manifest word of God sufficient to mooue vs to beleeue the contrarie, it is the part of each intelligent and prudent man, rather to cre­dite [Page 445] that which is apparent to sence, and common rea­son Aug. d. Trin. li. 4. ca. 6. Contra ra­tionem nemo so­brius, &c. Ibid. li. 3. ca. 11. Extat authoritas diuinarum Scriprurarum, vnde mens nostra deuiare non debet, nec relicto solidamen­to diuini [...], per suspicionum suarum abrupta precipitari, vbi nec sensus corporis regit, nec perspicua ra­tio veritatis elucet., A than to beleeue Paradoxes vpon no true ground and reason.

IESVIT.

First, we cannot imagine, that the whole body of Christ can be contained in the compasse of a small Hoast. B But it is not more incredible, that in a thing of small quan­tititie, for example the wing of a Flye, there should be so many parts, as vnfolded and laid together would couer the whole face of the world, both of heauen and earth. And yet it is demonstrable in Philosophy, That euen in the wing of a Flye there are so many parts, as broad and long as the wing, though still thinner and thinner, that Almightie God separating and vnfolding them, may therewith couer C the whole world. For certaine it is, that some finite num­ber of such parts, so separated each of them as long and as broad as a Flyes wing, would couer the face of the whole world: certaine also it is, That the wing of the Flye, is still diuisible into more and more such parts, so that no finite number is assignable, but God may still separate from that wing a greater number, without any end: therefore it is certaine, that in the wing of a Flye, there is so much quan­tity D as is sufficient to couer the face of the whole world, both of heauen and earth, if God would but separate and vnfold the same. Is not this Secret of Philosophy as in­credible to carnall Imagination, as the being of Christs body, within a small Hoast? Wee that cannot com­prehend things we see with eyes, and feele with hands, certainely we shall haue much adoe at the day of Judge­ment, to iustifie our not beleeuing any part of Gods word, by reason of the seeming absurditie thereof. E

ANSWER. A

You are not able to demonstrate, that God will haue vs be­leeue that the whole Organicall body of Christ, hauing the stature, quantitie, and magnitude of a perfect mans body, is con­tayned in the compasse of a small Hoast, or in a crum of Bread: for that Christ Iesus hath a true and perfect body, differing in kind from a Spirit, from an Angell, and from an immateriall substance, diuine reuelation teacheth: but that the same indiui­duall and corporeall substance, partaketh the spirituall manner B of Angelicall existence, and the diuine immensitie, simplicitie, and omnipresence, as Bellarmine Bel. d. Euchar. li. 1. ca. 2. & ca. 14. & li. 3. ca. 4. affirmeth, is not reueiled vn­to vs by the holy Ghost, neither can the same be inferred ex Re­uelatis, from any plaine and euident truth which God hath re­uealed Scotus. 4. dist. 11. q. 3. Fauentin. 4. d. 11. Disp. 45. ca. 3. Neque enim plura credita poni­debent, quam con­uinci possit ex ve­ritate creditorum.. Neither is it reuealed that the Abstracted formes, and accidents of Bread and Wine subsist, or are tasted, and felt, or nourish the body, and are afterwards corrupted, according to the manner of corporeall food, hauing no substantiall, or ma­teriall nature in them. Therefore this large tract, wherein the C Obiectour laboureth to prooue a possibilitie of the former, by diuine miracle and omnipotencie, is vnworthy our examinati­on: for we make no question of Gods omnipotent power, in effecting whatsoeuer himselfe pleaseth (as hath beene formerly answered, Pag. 181.) Yet the Fathers Aug. c. Faust. li. 26. and Schoolemen very well AEgid. Rom. in 1. Sent. d. 42. q. 4. Cum quaeritur, v­trū aliquid sit deo possibile, quod na­turae fit impossibi­le, distinguendum est de impossibili, quia si huiusmodi impossibile dici­tur, quia repugnat ipsi esse, prout est verificatio contra­dictoriorum, E sic quod naturae im­possibile est, est Deo impossibile. Ibid. Secundum quod aliqua im­plicanit contradi­ctonem, sic effugiunt rationem Potentiae. teach vs, That such things as implie a contradiction, and falsitie, are not the obiect of diuine power; and they teach vs further, that there is a twofold power in God, Ordinata, & Ab­soluta Greg. Armin. in 1. Sent. d. 42. q. Aquin. 1. q. 25. art. 5. Suar. d. Attrib. Dei. li. 3. ca. 9 n. 18. Caietan. 1. q. 52. ar. 2. Non quaerimus in hac re quid potentia Dei possit absolute, sed quid [...] ordo habet., one according to the order which himselfe hath fix­ed by his word and will, the other, according to the infinite­nesse D of his essence, and which exceedeth his will. Now accor­ding to the power of God, measured and regulate by his word and will, all things are impossible, which God will not haue to be. And thus we say, that it is impossible that the whole body of Christ can be in one crumme of Bread, or substantially present in many places at one instant: and accidents cannot subsist, or be tasted, felt, and nourish, and be conuerted into the substance of mans body, without a materiall subiect of inherencie, to su­staine and giue force vnto them.

[Page 447] But on the contrarie, we dispute not, what God is able to A effect by his absolute power, neither is this question of any vse in the matter now in hand; for the naturall kind of the things themselues, created by God and the Doctrine of holy Scrip­rure, teach vs what is the reuealed will of God: but that hee changeth this Ordinance which himselfe hath fixed, no Diuine Testimonie or Reuelation affirmeth, or teacheth.

The sole pretext which Papals haue, to palliate the absurdi­ties pursuing Transubstantiation at the heeles, are the words of Institution: But there is nothing coactiue in the said words to prooue this Romish Article, by the confession of the best lear­ned B Papists, as I haue formerly prooued, pag. 414.

And besides many other Reasons, This Argument out of our Sauiours words is most strong against Transubstantiation:

If nothing bee found in our Sauiours words, This is my Bodie, which prooueth the conuersion of the substance of bread into Christs bodie, more than which is likewise found, to change the quantitie and accidents, then Popish Transubstantiation, be­ing onely a conuersion of substance, and not of quantitie and ac­cidents, C cannot be concluded out of our Sauiours words.

But nothing is found in our Sauiours words, This is my Bodie, &c. proouing any more the conuersion of substance, than of quantitie and accidents: for our Sauiour tooke the whole bread, both according to the substance, and also according to the quantitie and accidents thereof, into his hands, and bles­sed and consecrated the same intirely, with the like thankesgi­uing and pronuntiation of words, and performed all things to the one as well as to the other.

Therefore if our Sauiours words prooue Transubstantiation of D the substance of Bread and Wine, they must likewise prooue con­uersion of the quantitie and accidents into Christs bodie and blood.

But by the confession of Papals, they doe not the latter: for the quantitie and accidents are not conuerted into Christs bodie and blood; and consequently, they doe not the former.

Now this being apparent, the Popish Doctrine of Transub­stantiation E hath no foundation in our Sauiours words, This is my bodie, &c.

I supersede therefore, to examine the Obiectors particular [Page 448] Arguments, among which, one is learnedly borrowed from A the flies wing, which according to Romish Phylosophie, may be thinned, extended, and inlarged, to make a case (such per­haps as Base Viols haue) to put the whole world into.

Euery punie in our Vniuersities can distinguish betweene Mathematicall or Potentiall diuision of a bodie, and Physicall or Actuall: Aristotle himselfe teaching vs, that there is Mi­nima caro, though there be not Corpus minimum.

But this fictious Cosmotecture and case, may well bee pa­raled to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, and they are twinnes, the one as credible and infallible in Theologie as the B other in Philosophie. But if our Aduersarie would be plea­sed to respite vs from beleeuing Transubstantiation, as an Ar­ticle of our Creed, vntill his vast words cap-case made of a flies wing bee finished, hee shall finde vs more flexible and prone to credite his Romish Doctrine in this and other Ar­ticles.

IESVIT.

Secondly, Wee cannot imagine the bodie of Christ to bee really combined vnto the consecrated formes, and not to C bee polluted by such indignities as may happen vnto the formes; yet wee haue seene, or may see, things able to make this not to seeme incredible: for holy men often by Prayer so purifie their soules, and by contemplation, bring their spirits to such an independencie of their sences, that neither bitter meates offend their tastes, nor loathsome sents their smell, nor shrill cries their hearing, yea, bur­nings and torturings are not perceiued, their spirit being D eloyned through Diuine vnpolluted affection, from the con­tagion of the bodie, vnto the substance whereof it still remaines most really vnited. This being so, cannot the glorious bodie of Christ (graced with most Diuine Orna­ments, flowing from the excessiue blisse of the soule, made spirituall, impassible, and insearchable) bee really pre­sent, vnto the formes of consecrated bread, and yet free, E immune, and wholly independent of any contagion or cor­ruption that may happen to those formes; especially the bodie of Christ, not being so strictly and substantially tied vnto the formes, as the spirit is to the bodie it informeth, [Page 449] but is present vnto them, as an Angell assistant is to the A bodie wherein he worketh.

What dishonour can it bee to attribute to Christs most venerable bodie, this spirituall manner of Angelicall pre­sence, yea, rather a participation of the Diuine Im­mensitie? for as God by his incomprehensible Immensi­tie exists euery where, no lesse pure in the sincke than in the Sunne, no lesse sweete in the dunghill, than in a Garden of odoriferous flowers: So the bodie of Christ, B by supernaturall participation of his Diuine Presence, is really vpon earth, in things visible inuisible, in things hurtfull impassible, in things noysome inuiolable, in things impure immaculable; to his friends that re­ceiue him with loue, most sweet and comfortable, and o­uerflowing in Graces; but to the vnworthie present, in a manner dead and sencelesse, as if hee were not there at all. And as hee that receiues into his armes a bodie, C wherein the spirit absorpt in contemplation, neither fee­ling nor felt, lyeth inclosed, may bee said to imbrace the bodie without the spirit, which is in that bodie insensi­ble, and as good as if it were not there: so they Aug. tract. 26. [...] 10. & 59. Caeteri Apostoli māducauerunt pa­nem Dominum Iu­das autem panem Domini. that receiue vnworthily, are sometimes said by the Fa­thers, to receiue the Sacrament, without the bodie of Christ; because, though the bodie of Christ bee really in the Sacrament they receiue, yet hee is there in a dead manner in regard of them, as if hee were not there at all, D because hee stirres not vp heauenly actions in them, nor makes them feele the workings of his grace and loue in their sences.

ANSWER.

The glorified bodie of Christ, being impassible, cannot bee polluted or corrupted: because, although it retaineth the same essentiall forme, figure, and substance August. de Genes. ad lit. lib. 12. cap. 7. Resur­get corpus spirita­le, eo quod miris modis, ad omnem facilitatem & incorruptionem, spiritui subdatur, & sine [...] indigen­tia corporalium alimentorum, solo viuificetur spiritu, non quod incorpoream substantiam sit habiturum. Id. Epist. 111. Ita futurum sit spirituale corpus, vt propter ineffabilem quandam facilitatem, spirituale di­catur, seruet tamen substantiam corporalem. Id. Enchir. c. 91. Id. Ep. 56., yet it is deliuered from all terrene staines and frailtie, and conuerted into caelestiall E [Page 450] puritie and stabilitie Aug. d. Fid. & Simb. ca. 6. Non ità dictum est, quasi corpus vertatur in spiritum, & spiritus fiat: quià & nunc corpus nostrum quod animale dicitur, non in animam versum est, & anima factum, sed spirituale corpus intel­ligitur, quià ità coaptandum est, vt coelesti habitationi conueniat, omni fragilitate ac labe terrena in coelestem pu­ritatem & stabilitatem mutata & conuersa.. And as this bodie cannot be polluted, so A likewise it cannot be masticated, or ground with mens teeth, as a Roman Synod vnder Pope Nicholas compelled Berengarius to confesse d. Consecrat. Dist. 2. c. Ego Berengarius. Panem & Vinum quae in altari ponuntur, post consecrationem non solum Sacramentum, sed etiàm verum corpus & sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi esse, & sensualitèr non solum Sacramento, sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum, tra­ctari, frangi, & fidelium dentibus atteri..

But from impassibilitie to omnipresence and immensitie, it B followeth not, for impassibilitie is an affection of finite crea­tures, but omnipresence and immensitie are diuine and in com­municable properties.

And although in an extasie there is alienation and indepen­dencie of the spirit vpon the sences Aquin. 22. q. 173. ar. 3. August. d. Gen. ad lit. li. 12. ca. 26. & ad Simplici­an. q. 1. Greg. Mor. li. 5. ca. 22. & li. 32. c. 7., yet this argueth not that Christs humane bodie is substantially and insensiblie in the consecrated creatures of Bread and Wine, or according to the manner of Angelicall presence, or rather a participation of diuine immensitie (as the Iesuit, compelled to turne vbiqui­tarie, speaketh) or without bodilie stature, posture, and di­mensions. C

Lastly, the Obiector saith, that wicked persons receiue in­to their bodilie mouthes and stomach the substance of Christs flesh. He prooueth not this assertion, but bringeth only a simi­litude taken from the spirit of man in an extasie, and pretendeth that the Fathers did therefore affirme wicked persons to re­ceiue the outward Sacrament without the bodie of Christ, be­cause Christ in regard of them, is in the Sacrament after a dead manner. But S. Augustine, and other Fathers speake not figu­ratiuely, or by similitude, but literally and expressely, saying, D Non manducant illam carnem Cyril. in Ioh. li. 4. ca. 14., wicked persons doe not eat that flesh. The thing it selfe Aug. in Ioh. [...]. 27., to wit, the bodie of Christ, whereof this Bread is a Sacrament, is receiued of euerie man which ea­teth it, to life, and by no man, to death Read before pag. 407..

IESVIT.

Thirdly, We cannot imagine the same bodie can bee in many places together at the same time: Jt is true, but as hardly can we imagine the soule to be in the head and in E the feet of a man, one and the same without diui sion in it selfe; or an Angell to bee in two townes of the countrie whereof he is president, as distant one from the other as [Page 451] Yorke and London. Also who can conceiue God, who is infi­nitly A one and indiuisible, to be both in heauen and on earth at once? What marueile then, that imagination failes vs to Aug. Epist. 3. ad Vo­lutian. apprehend the multiplyed presence of Christs bodie in the Sacrament, which is Spirituall, Angelicall, Supernaturall, comparable with the diuine, that S. Gregorie Nissen Gre. Nissen. in orat, d. Pasch. stickes not to say, Sicut Diuinitas replet mundum, & tamen vna est, ita innumerabilibus locis offertur, & tamen vnum corpus est, The bodie of Christ being glo­rious, B is, for operation as swift and agill as any thought; but a mans thought is so quicke, that one may be by thought in two disjoined places at once; for example, in London and at Rome. Some Diuines giue such agilitie to Angels, that they can place themselues substantially where they please by a thought; and thinke, that as their thoughts, so like wise Caiet. 1. p. q. 52. ar. 2. Ferrar. 3. c. Gent. [...]. 65. Marcil. in 2. q. 2. ar. 2. Dion. Cy­sters. in 2. dist. 6. q. 1. ar. 1. conclus. 6. their substances are so independent of corporall space, that they can be naturally in two distinct places without being C in the spaces interiacent. But the agilitie of Christs glori­ous bodie is more excellent and perfect, as being superna­turall, than the naturall agilitie of Angells, yea than of thoughts; why then should we make any doubt but he may be disioined in different places at once?

ANSVVER.

This discourse being reduced to argumentation, is as follow­eth. D

If a soule may be in euerie part of the bodie, the thought of man in many places, an Angell in many distinct vbities, and if God is in heauen and earth; then the bodie of Christ may be in many places. But the first is true, Ergo, &c.

It is answered, First, one part of the antecedent is false: for an Angell being a finite creature, is at one instant difinitiuely in one vbitie onely Hugo Victor. d. Sacram. li. 1. pa. 3. ca. 18. Omne quod definitū est, secun­dum aliquid locale est, [...] in eo ipso quod finem & terminū habet locum habet, & determinatlocū, sicut determinatum est in lo­co. [...] corpus dimensionē habens, loco circumscribitur: quoniā ei secundum locum, principiū, medium, & finis [...]. Spiritus vero quoniā demensionem non capit, sed definitione sola terminatur, circumscriptionē qui­dē E non recipit loci, & tamèn loco quodammodo concluditur, quoniam cum hic alicubi praesens sit totus, alibi non inuenitur. Aquin. p. 1. q. 52. ar. 2. Ib. Caiet. Marsil. 2. q. 2. ar. 1. Angeli sunt in loco definitiuè, quià sunt sic in vno situ, quod non sunt in alio quolibet. [...]. in li. 3. c. Gent. ca. 68. Dicitur de mente sancti Thomae, quod vnus Angel' non potest esse simul in pluribus locis, vt plura sunt, id est, in quantū accipiuntur, vt duo loca, totalitèr distincta, quià ab vna [...] finita, non potest nisi vna operatio [...] simul, & consequenter nisi vnus effectus, sed benè po­test esse in pluribus locis, per modum vnius loci vt [...]. vnum totalem locum constituant. Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. q. 52. ar. 2. [...]. 3.; for that which mooueth and passeth from [Page 452] one vbitie to another, is not in both the places at once; but A Angels mooue and passe from one place to another, Genes. 28. 12. Math. 4.11. & cap. 12.43. Marc. 5.12. Ioh. 5.4. Genes. 19.1. & 32.1. Apoc. 14.6. & ca. 18.1. & 20.1. Damasc. li. 2. ca. 3. Ange­li dum sunt in terra non sunt in coelo, Whiles Angels are on earth they are not in heauen. And the opinion of some Schoole­men, alledged to the contrarie, is not to be regarded, because their owne fellowes Malon. in [...]. sent. lib. 2. d. Angelis disp. 9. sect. 2. teach, that there is no certainetie of these and the like assertions.

Secondly, the consequence is infirme, because of the diffe­rence which is betweene a bodie, and the things compared B thereunto in the antecedent. First, the soule of man is in euery member of the bodie, because it is the forme thereof, and be­cause it is by nature immaterial. Secondly, God is euery where, because he is infinit. Thirdly, the thought of man is a spirituall or intentionall motion and action, and not a substantiall thing; therefore Speculando phantasmata, it may conceiue and appre­hend diuers distant obiects Per modum vnius Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. q. 52. ar. 2. conclus. [...]. Aristote­les dixit, quod non possum' simul plu­ta intelligere per modum plurium. at one instant. Fourthly, Angells are immateriall substances, and therefore their motion and action is sodaine, yet determined to one place, at one instant: but an humane body is materiall, finite, C and limited to a certaine space, and measure, and differeth from all the former things, mentioned in the argument, in kind, and motion, in manner of being present. ( Reade before pag. 180.) Ergo haec nihil ad Rhombum. Therefore all these instances, to this purpose and question of bodies, are no better than shadowes without bodies.

IESVIT.

Fourthly, We finde difficultie to conceiue that accidents D existing separated from any substance, can performe the office of substance, euen to the nourishment of mans body; but we should perchance find as much difficultie to beleeue, That of a little kernell of an Apple, a great tree may bee made and nourished, by the force and vigour proceeding from the same, did not we see by daily experience the same to be true; that ashes may be made of glasse; that stones in E the stomacke of a Doue, yron in the belly of an Ostridge, be turned into flesh; that of a rotten barke of a tree falling in­to the water, should be bred and produced a perfect bird, to me seemes more incredible, than that God should make the [Page 453] accidents of Bread, separated from their substance to nou­rish A mans body: for the dead barke of a tree may seeme to haue no more efficacie of it selfe to produce a liuing crea­ture, specially so perfect a bird as Barnacles, than haue the accidents of Bread, to feede and breede the flesh of a li­uing man. Yea many Philosophers teach, and in my iudge­ment conuince, that in substantiall generations, where no cause coequall in perfection to the effect produced is present, God by his Omnipotencie doth supplie deficiencie of natu­rall B causes: Why then should any man so much mislike our Doctrine, that in this Mysterie, where the substance of Bread wants, God by the secret operation of his power, supplies the defect thereof; seeing by the opinion of many learned Philosophers, his prouidence (by the like secret spe­ciall working) doth ordinarily, daily, and hourely, supply the manifold defects of substantiall secondarie Agents. Neither is the manner how God can doe this, difsicile to explicate, C For he may inable the quantitie of Bread, to receiue and sustaine the working of mans nutritiue power, and when in that quantitie there is the last accidentall disposition, to the forme of flesh, he can secretly produce againe Materi­am primam that was of the Bread, and combine the same with the prepared quantitie, and the substantiall forme of Flesh: What reason is there why God may not doe this, yea doe it sooner than we speake it?

Wherefore the seeming absurdities of this mysterie being D (as J haue shewed) meerely imaginarie, and not like those against the Trinitie, and the Incarnation, wherein not so much imagination, as reason, findes difficultie; it is the part not onely of sincere Christian faith, but also of a cleere excellent wit, to conceiue them; and not to permit wandring vnruly fancie, destitute of reason, to controll our beleefe, about the literall sence of Christs words, so many waies E by the grauest testimonies of Antiquitie recommended vn­to vs.

ANSVVER. A

That Accidents may subsist, and haue their naturall force and operation, without a subiect of support or inhaerencie, im­plies a contradiction; for it is of the being and definition of Accidents to be in another Porphyr. Isa­gog. cap. 5. [...]. Accidentis esse est inesse., or to be in their subiect: And none of the Examples taken from a Kernell, Ashes, Iron in the belly of an Ostridge, the barke of a tree, &c. are ad idem, for these are not Accidents without a substance, but reall bodies, hauing by nature a proportion and propension to produce B their owne effects, either as seminall causes, or true materials, conuerted by heate, fire, and art; or things putrescent, for­med, and animated by the heate of the Sunne, and other se­cret and naturall causes: That an Akorne should become an Oake, is wonderfull, as the workes of God are: yet it is as na­turall, as that a Lyon begets a Lyon, nay, as that the Sunne or fire shineth. That of ashes is made glasse, what is it, but that a transparent bodie is made of a bodie not transparent: so, Yee of Snow, &c. And concerning Stones, Iron, &c. I doe not thinke that these feed or nourish Doues, Hawkes, Struthioca­meles, &c. but onely coole or cleanse them: and this I count C not impossible in nature, that vegetatiue heate should in short time dissolue stones. The Barnacles are generatio ex putri, as are Mice, Frogs, and Serpents: but what is this to accidents nourishing without matter and substance.

Now for all the former, wee know the truth and certaintie by naturall reason, and by experience of our sences: but there is no naturall or supernaturall rule or Law, no manifest demon­stration either to sence or reason, no reuelation of Faith, that the abstracted formes of bread and wine subsist without a sub­iect, D and haue power to nourish, and may bee tasted and felt, and also putrifie: but Romists presumptuously forme these Chimera's and Idols in the forge of their owne deceiued brest, and they deserue to bee fed onely with accidents (like Birds that pecked at the painted grapes Plin. Nat. Hist. lib. 35. cap. 10. Cum ille (Xeuxis) detulisset vuas pi­ctas tanto successu, vt in scenam aues aduolarent, &c.) which thinke to feed any intelligent Reader with such improper and extrauagant ac­cidents.

IESVITS 3. Consideration. E

Thirdly, to make Christians incline to [...] this My­sterie, so difficile to carnall imagination, this Considera­tion [Page 455] may be very potent, to wit, that in beleeuing the same, A on the one side, there may be great merit, and excellent faith, if it be a truth; and on the other side, though (which is impossible) it should be false, yet in beleeuing it, we shall not fall into any damnable errour. For although we sup­pose this an vnpossible case, yet what can be laid to our charge, which wee may not defend and iustifie by all the rules of equitie and reason, if we be accused that we tooke Bread to be the body of Christ, adoring the same as God, so B committing Idolatry, we may defend, that both for soule and body we are innocent herein. For seeing the body is not made guiltie, but by a guiltie mind, euen our body may pleade not guilty, seeing our mind, our thoughts, or deuoti­on, were fully and totally referred vnto Christ, whom we truely apprehend by faith, as vailed with the Accidents of Bread, and so may repell the reproach of [...] Bread Worshippers, with saying: C

Quae nouit mens est, pani nil vouimus illa.

Neither did we beleeue that the Bread was changed into Christs body vpon sleight reasons, or mooued by the fancies of our owne head, but contrary to our fancies out of Reue­rence to the expresse words of Christ, This is my body. A sense declared by most antient Fathers, defined by many generall Councells, deliuered by full consent of our Ance­stors, D so practised in the Church for many ages without any knowne beginning; finally, confirmed with the most credi­ble and constant report of innumerable most euident mira­cles. Can a Christian beleeue any points of Religion vpon surer grounds? And if God at the day of iudgement, will condemne none but such as liuing in this world wronged him in his honour, Why should Catholikes feare any hard sentence in respect of their prompt Credulitie of Transub­stantiation, E that is, of Gods Word taken in the plaine pro­per sense? Js it an [...] to his veritie, that they denie their senses, correct their imaginations, reforme their dis­courses, abnegate their iudgements, rather than not to be­leeue [Page 456] what to them seemeth his Word? Js it an iniury to A his power, to be persuaded he can doe things incomprehen­sible without number, put the same body in innumerable places at once? Make a body occupy no place, and yet re­maine a quantitatiue substance in it selfe? Js it iniury to his charitie, to thinke that loue vnto men makes him vnite himselfe really and substantially with them, and to be (as it were) incarnate anew in euery particular faithfull man, entering really into their bodies to signifie efficatiously his B inward coniunction, by spirit, vnto their soules? Finally, is it an iniury to his Wisedome to beleeue that to satisfie on the one side the will of his Father, that would haue him euer in heauen, sitting at his right hand; on the other side the Ardencie of his owne affection vnto men, desiring to be perpetually with them, he inuented a manner, how still re­maining glorious in heauen, he might also be continually on earth, with his Church, secretly not to take from them the merit of faith, yet to afford full satisfaction to his owne C loue, really by continuing personall presence and most in­time coniunction with them.

On the other side, it imports them that thinke Transub­stantiation impossible, or that God cannot put the same bo­dy in different places at once, to consider, if they erre (easie it is for men to erre, that with the compasse of their vn­derstandings measure the power of God) how dangerous and vnexcusable their errour will prooue, when they shall D be called to giue vnto their omnipotent Maker a finall ac­count, particularly of this Doctrine, so much derogating from him? Let them thinke how they will answer, if God lay to their charge the neglect of the most prudent and reasonable aduise which S. Chrys. giues: Let vs beleeue Chrys. Hom. 83. in Math. God (saith he) let vs not reiect his Word, though the same seeme secret, and absurd vnto our cogitation and sense, for his speech doth surpasse our reason and sense, his words E cannot deceiue vs, but our senses be deceiued easily and of­ten. How will they reply if they be pressed with the Inter­gatory which S. Cyril makes vnto such misbeleeuers; If Li. 12. in Ioh. ca. 52. [Page 457] thou couldst not comprehend the diuine operation of God, A Why didst thou not accuse the imbecility of mans wit, rather than the omnipotencie of God? Or how (disputing or pro­posing so many arguments against Gods power, reiecting or questioning the same, because they could not vnderstand it) they neuer called to mind the saying of S. Augustine, Aug. li. 22. d. Ci­uit. Dei. ca. 11. Ecce quibus argumentis diuinae omnipotentiae, hu­mana contradicit infirmitas? B

ANSWER.

This third and last consideration is a meere declamation; grounded vpon a vaine supposition; for it presumeth as granted, the opinion of Transubstantiation, to be most probable, and reasonable, as being declared by many antient Fathers, defined by generall Councells, &c. But this supposition is a begging of the question, for not so much as one antient Father, or generall Councell, did euer declare or define the same, as it will plaine­ly appeare to all iudicious Persons, which shall compare and apply the sentences of Fathers and antient Councells, to the C Popish definition of Transubstantiation. And the said Do­ctrine is not grounded vpon our Sauiours words: and the mira­cles which Romists venditate, to authorise the same, are ey­ther Fryars fables [...]. Wal­singhā. Hist. Ang­lor. in Rich. 2. pag. 281. In diebus istis in ore cuiuslibet bonum fuit argumentum tenens tam de forma quam de materia. Hic est frater ergo est men­dax, sicut est illud. Hoc est album ergo est coloratum. Roiard. prefat. Hom. d. Fest. Sanct. Insertis passim fa­bulis, ac meris nugamentis, ipsam labefactarunt veritatem., or reports misapplyed, and wrested to a contrary end.

And that there should be merit, or at leastwise, lesse perill in D adhering to this doctrine rather than to any other Durand. 4 d. 11. q. 1. Temerarium est dicere, quod corpus Christi, di­uina virtute non possit esse in hoc Sacramento, nisi per [...] panis in ipsum. Posset Deus facere quod corpus Christi esset de nouo in Sacramento Altaris, absque mutatione sui, & absque mutatione alterius in ipsum, facta tamen aliqua mutatione circa panem vel aliquid aliud., may bee proclaimed ouer and ouer againe by Romists Aug. c. Faust. Man. li. 2. [...]. 49. Vbi hoc legerit nescio, nisi forte in corde suo, tanquam in libro nefariarum fallatiarum., E but it deserueth credit when they demonstrate, That an opinion which is not grounded vpon diuine Reuelation, and which containeth so many difficulties, as cannot be solued, and the beleefe whereof is vnnecessarie, can be imbraced with safetie, and expectation of reward.

To the words following in the Iesuit (That he might also bee continually with his Church secretly) it is answered, That exclu­ding Transubstantiation, Christ Iesus is continually with his Church secretly, by his grace, spirit, and mysticall vnion; and [Page 458] he dwelleth in the hearts of iustified persons by faith, Epkes. A 3. v. 17.

S. Chrysostome, S. Cyril, and S. Augustine, in the places obie­cted, affirme, that we are not to beleeue our dull and carnall sence, when it suggesteth vnto vs that which is repugnant to faith; and when it acknowledgeth no other force and operati­on in the holy Sacraments, but that which is sensible and natu­rall; But embracing this doctrine of the holy Fathers, we can­not from thence extract the fancie of Transubstantiation.

Learned Papists themselues acknowledge the intricacies and difficulties of this Article Aquin. 3. q. 75. ar. 2. ad 3. In hac conuersione sunt plura, difficiliora quam in creatione. Durand. 4. d. 11. q. 1. nu. 15. Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3. Vasq. 2 in 3. Tho. to 3. disp. 183. ca. 1. n. 1. Audito nomine Transub­stantiationis, tanta inter recentiores aliquos scholasti­cos, de natura illi­us exorta fuit controuersia, vt quo magis se ab ea extricare conati sunt, eo maioribus difficultatibus seipsos C implicarunt., many of them affirme, that seclu­ding B the authoritie of the Romish Church, there is nothing in diuine Reuelation, compelling to beleeue it Read before pag. [...].. The doctrine is not Catholike or Antient Henriq. Sum. li. 8. c. 23. Scotus negat Dectrinam de con­uersione & Transubstantiatione esle antiquam. Idem. Gabriel in Can. Miss. lect. 41.: The Propugners of it vntill the late Trident Councell, disagree in that which is maine and substan­tiall Bellarm. d. Euchar. li. 3. ca. 1. Durandus docuit partem vnam essentialem id est formam panis conuerti, partem alteram id est ma­teriam non conuerti. ca. 13. Sententia Durandi est haeretica etsi ipse non sit dicendus Haereticus, quia paratus fuerit iuditio Ecclesia acqui; escere. in it; and for auoiding one figure, they make many Read. B B. Morton. Appeale. li. 2. ca. 2. Sect. 24. n. 81. pa. 124.. Therefore it standeth not with Christian Wisedome, to im­brace or maintaine this doctrine, and Romists are more confi­dent than prudent in imposing the same as an Article of the Creed, censuring the Noncredents as hainous Heretikes.

My finall conclusion about this Article is:

That doctrine, which is not expresly taught, or formally deduced from holy Soripture Vasq. in 3. Th. to. 3. disp. 181. c. 1. n. 7. Cum ex sola veritate verborum, conuer [...] quae fit in hoc Sacramento colligenda sit; neque a­liunde Ecclesia il­lam deducere potu­erit (hoc enim vni­cum fuit Ecclesi­asticae Traditionis fundamentū, &c.): which no antient Councell or Church for the first 600 yeares, plainely taught; and vnto which, many ad­uerse passages are extant in the monuments of antiquitie: also, D which is repugnant to sence and common reason, and hath no appa­rent vtilitie [...]. d. Colonia. ex [...]. Deus potest corpus suam praesens cum pane facere, manente substantia panis, & non per aliquam mutationem quae sit ad [...] vt per se terminum: & tamen per illam acquiritur presentia eiusdem rati­onis, cum illa quae nunc habetur. E, ought not to be imposed as an article of diuine faith.

But such is the doctrine of Romish Transubstantiation:

Therefore it ought not to be imposed as an article of diuine faith, and the Roman Church should either cancell this part of their new Creed, or be lesse censorious in obtruding of it.

THE SEVENTH POINT. A B COMMVNION VN­DER ONE KIND, AND THE ABBETTING OF IT BY CONCOMITANCIE.

IESVIT. C

YOur most Excellent Maiestie, in the Proposition of this Controuersie, shewes your deepe insight into Theo­logicall difficulties, perceiuing a maine ground whereon the Catholicke opinion of the lawfulnesse of Communion vn­der D one kinde standeth, to wit, Concomitancie: which be­ing granted, Communion vnder one kind, is iustified.

ANSVVER.

IF his Sacred MAIESTIE should E yeeld you Concomitancie, yet vpon that ground Communion in one kinde could not be iustified: Neuerthelesse, we denie both [...] and Communion vnder one kinde.

IESVIT. § 1. A The Doctrine of Concomitan­cie prooued.

THe Doctrine of Concomitancie is, that vnder the forme of bread, not onely the bodie of Christ, but al­so his precious blood and blessed soule, are truely and really contained; the bodie directly, and by vertue of B the words of Consecration; the blood and the soule conse­quently: for being contained within the bodie of Christ, they must needs Concomitate, that is, follow the bodie, in what place soeuer the same bee; neither can any that ac­knowledges the reall Presence denie this Concomitancie, without falling into many absurdities, as I prooue by three Arguments.

ANSWER. C

THe bodie of Christ is considered two wayes: First, Ac­cording to the nature of a perfect liuing bodie; second­ly, As it is represented and exhibited in the Sacrament. If we consider it the first way, the blood of Christ cannot properly be said to be in his bodie, by Concomitancie, (for then it were accidentally therein) but as a part in the whole; for as the bones, sinews, and veynes, are integrall parts of ana­turall humane bodie, so likewise is the blood Yrebarn. 4. d. 8. Disp. 28. Sect. 3. Corpus, &c. est substantia inclu­dens omnes partes, quae corpus orga­nicum quoquo modo integrant, siue sint animabiles siue non, & hoc sensu sanguis ingreditur integritatem corporis.: and naturall D parts are in the whole, by substantiall vnion, not by Concomi­tancie; for then they were in the bodie, or belonging there­unto, as an adiunct to his subiect.

If we consider the bodie of Christ, taken for the more solid parts thereof, as it is represented and exhibited in the Sacra­ment, to wit, as it was fixed to the crosse, and diuided from the blood; then, according to this Sacramentall representation and exhibition, the same alone neither containeth nor representeth E the blood Ruard. Tapper. ar. 15. Species panis solum significant corpus pro nobis in cruce oblatum, cum iam esset exangue, & species vini, sanguinem effusum, & quasi à corpore separatum. Yrebarn. in 4. d. 8. q. 1. Disp. 28. Sect. 3. Corpus stricte sumptum, signatum per se, à spe­ciebus panis nihil sanguinis fignati includit. Tartaret. 4. d. 8. q. 1. Bassolis. 4. d. 8. q. 1. ar. 1..

[Page 461] The sacred Eucharist is one intire Sacrament Fauentin. 4. d. 8. Disp. 29. Non est vnum vnitate Indi­uisibilitatis, quia sunt plura signa, &c. tamen est vnum vnitate integrita­tis, quia ambae spe­cies integrant vnū perfectum & totale sacramentum., (totum A compositum) hauing two externall Elements, to wit, Bread and Wine, and these two signes or elements, represent the materi­all Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse Greg. Dial. li. 4. cap. 58. Ambros. d. poenit. lib. 2. cap. 3. Chrys. tom. 1. in Psal. 22. Quotidie in si­militudinem cor­poris & sanguinis Christi, panem & vinum secundum ordinem Melchise­dech, nobis osten­dit in Sacramento. Aug l. 83. q. 61. Ipse est sacerdos noster in aeternum, secun­dum ordinem Mel­chisedech, qui se­metipsum obtulit, Holocaustum pro peccatis nostris, & eius sacrificij similitudinem celebrandā in suae passionis memoriam commendauit. Holocausti cius imaginem ad memoriam passionis suae in Ecclesia celebrandam [...]. Id. d. fid. ad Petrum. c. 19. In isto sacri­ficio, [...] Actio atq, commemoratio est carnis Christi, quam [...] obtulit, & quam pro nobis idem Deus effudit. Justin. Martir. Colloq. cum Tryph. in hac Prophetia, & de pane quem nobis noster Christus tradidit, ad commemorationem corporis assumpti, propter credentes in eum, propter quos & passibilis natus est: & de poculo quod in memoriam sanguinis sui, cum gratiarum actione sumendum dedit, fit manifesta mentio., which consisted, at the time of the Oblation thereof, of a bodie fixed on a tree, and the same dying by effusion of blood, Luk. 22.21. And in the holy Eucharist, Christ is as it were crucified before our eyes, and his bodie and blood, by representation, are diuided: and God Almightie vseth these mysticall creatures, as instruments, to communicate vnto euery worthie Receiuer, the Sacrifice of Christ his Sonne, 1. Cor. 10.16. But as the Sacrifice vpon the B Crosse, was not performed in one of these Indiuiduals apart, or by it selfe, but ioyntly in them both; and without effusion of blood, there is no remission of sinnes Ambros. in 1. Cor. 11. Testamentum in sanguine constitutum est, quia [...] Diuinisanguis testis est. In cuius typum nos [...] misticum sanguinis ad tuitionem corporis & animae nostrae percipimus, quia sanguis Domini, sanguinem nostrum redemit, id est totum hominem saluum fecit. Caro [...] saiuatoris prosalute corporis, sanguis [...] anima nostra effusus est., Heb. 9.22: So likewise in the holy Eucharist the bodie of Christ is represented, as it was diuided from the blood; and againe the blood, as seuered from the bodie: and God concurreth with both the Elements, deliuered and receiued; with the one, as it were by inception, and with the other by consummation: and Communicants partake not the whole Sacrifice of Christ, vntill they haue receiued both the materiall parts of the Sacrament. C

Here then is no Popish Concomitancie, either of the blood D to the bodie, when it is receiued apart, or of the bodie to the blood, when that is receiued alone: but the Sacrament reacheth the bodie & blood, as they were diuided, and they are then con­ioyned to make one Sacrifice, when they are both deliuered and receiued. The whole cannot be in one part, neither doth one part Concomitate another, but is substantially vnited to ano­ther: and in a Sacrifice or Sacrament, compounded of diuisible parts, he which giueth or receiueth one materiall part, doth not therein or thereby distribute or receiue the whole. E

Neither againe is the Deitie vnited to the bodie or blood of Christ by Concomitancie, but by personall vnion.

Thus then I argue:

Whatsoeuer is receiued in the Sacrament by vs, was before of­fered to God vpon the Crosse.

[Page 462] But the bodie of Christ hauing bloud in it by concomitance, A or the deitie in it by concomitancie, or the bloud of Christ hauing in it the bodie or [...], by concomitancie, was not offered to God vpon the Crosse: for before the effusion of the bloud, the same was in the bodie as a part, not by concomitancie. After the full effusion, the bloud was diuided from the bodie, and the [...] was with the bodie by personall vnion, and not by concomitan­cie, Ergo,

At this day the bodie and deitie of Christ are not in the bloud of Christ by concomitancie, &c.

IESVIT. B

First, hee that acknowledgeth the reall presence of Christs sacred bodie vnder the forme of bread, and de­nies concomitancie, doth in his beleefe seperate the bloud and soule of Christ from his bodie: but to seperate either Christs diuinitie from his humanitie, or soule from his bo­die, or his bloud from his flesh, is vnlawfull; for such a beleeuer doth dissolue and destroy Christ Jesus, and so is C one of the number of them that S. Iohn condemneth, Om­nis 1. Ioh. 4.3. Spiritus qui soluit Iesum, non est ex Deo, & hic est Antichristus.

ANSVVER.

The summe of this obiection is,

Whosoeuer dissolueth Christ Iesus, is an Antichrist. D

Euerie one who admitteth reall presence, and yet denyeth con­comitancie, dissolueth Christ Iesus, for he seperateth the bloud and soule of Christ from his bodie, and his diuinitie from his hu­manitie: Ergo,

Whosoeuer in the reall presence denyeth concomitancie, is an Antichrist.

Our answer is, Whosoeuer dissolueth Christ Iesus, accor­ding to S. Iohns meaning, 1. Ioh. 4.3. by denying his deitie, hu­manitie, or personall vnion Aquin. in 1. Ioh. 4. Qui soluit, id est, diuidit Iesum, velseperans diuinitatem ab eo, vt Arius, vt Appollinaris, qui [...] diuinitatem pro anima, vel carnem, vt Ma­nicheus, qui ponit quod Christus assumpsit phantasiam, & non veram, vel [...] vnitatem, vt Nestorius, &c. B. Iustinian. Ib. [...] ratione dis­suere, aut dissoluere conatur, &c., is Antichrist. But the denying of E Popish concomitancie inferreth none of these.

[Page 463] For although we affirme, that in the holy Eucharist the bo­die A and bloud of Christ are represented distinctly, and as they were diuided at his passion: yet this dissolueth not Iesus, but signifieth the seperation of his bodie and bloud formerly made vpon the Crosse Ambros. in 1. Cor. 11. Quia mor­te Domini liberati sumus, hui' rei me­moriam in edendo & potando carnem & sanguinem, quae pro nobis oblata sunt, significamus nouum testamentū in hijs consecuti.. And we beleeue that the holy Ghost, accor­ding to the distinct signification Vasq. in 3. Tho. tom. 3. disp. 215. cap. 2. nu. 13. Diuinitas quae est [...] causa, ità assumpsit vt [...], ad producendam gratiam, [...] Sacramenta, vt suam efficacitatem significationi eorum accommodaret, sicut reuera accommodare potuit. of the sacramentall ele­ments, reacheth in a spirituall manner, the bodie and bloud of Christ crucified, to all faithfull communicants, and addeth a se­uerall effect and vertue of spirituall refection to each distinct part receiued Ibid. nu. 9. Vnaquaequè species huius Sacra­menti, quatenus Sacramenti pars est, suam habet signisicationem diuersam. Cumquè significationem in Sacra­mentis nouae legis, consequatur efficacia, quià id [...] quod significant, sequitur vnamquamquè speciem in hoc Sacramento, suum effectum per se operari, sicut etiàm suum refectionis modum per se significat. Ruard. Tapper. ar. 15. Quià per diuersa hic operatur instrumenta variè significantia, [...], videlicet, & corpus suum, quae sunt causae immediatae effectus Sacramentalis, ipse etiàm diuersos operatur effectus, donaquè sua diuidit, idem ipse [...]. according to the signification; and this is con­fessed by Vasques, Ruard Tapper, Alexander Halles. B

IESVIT. C

And this argument hath greatest force in their opi­nion, who shall thinke that Christ leaues heauen for the time, to come downe really according to his Bodie and Bloud: for how can the bodic of Christ come downe from heauen without bloud and soule, vnlesse he come downe dead? and so Christ should be not only mystically and figuratiuely, but truely and really massacred in the Sacrament, and the Eu­charist D be a bloudie Sacrifice, and not incruent as the Fa­thers tearme it.

ANSWER.

None of our part thinke that Christ leaueth heauen, to come downe really according to his bodie and bloud, Act. 3.21. Do­nec seculum finiatur, [...] est Dominus (Augustine in Ioh. tract. E 7.) vntill the world be finished, the Lord continues aboue. And the Fathers tearme the holy Eucharist, an vnbloudie sacrifice, not because Christ is properly, and in his substance offred there­in, but because his bloudie sacrifice vpon the crosse, is, by this vnbloudie commemoration represented, called to remem­brance, [Page 464] and applyed. Read the sentences of Fathers Cyprian. Ep. 63. Quotiescun­què ergo Calicem in commemorati­onem Domini, & passionis eius offerrimus. Aug. c. Faust. lib. 20. cap. 18. Christiani peracti huius sacrificij memoriam cele­brant, sacrosancta oblatione, & participatione corporis & sanguinis Domini, Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Nonnè semel immolatus est Christus in semetipso? & tamen in Sacramento non tantum per omnes Paschae so­lennitates, sed etiàm omni die, populis immolatur, nec vtiquè mentitur, qui interrogatus, eum responde­ret immolari: si enim Sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum Sacramentasunt, non haberent omnino Sacramenta non essent. contr. Faust. lib. 20. cap. 21. Huius sacrificij caro & sanguis, antè aduentum Christi per victimas similitudinum promittebatur, in passione Christi per ipsam veritatem reddebatur, post ascensum Christi per Sacramentum memoriae celebratur. Quest. 83. cap. 61. Christus qui semetipsum obtulit holocaustum pro peccatis nostris, huius sacrificij similitudinem, & holocausti eius ima­ginem in passionis suae memoriam celebrandam dedit, & commendauit. In lib. Sent. prosper. Sicut coelestis B panis, qui verè Christi caro est, suo modo vocatur corpus Christi, cum reuera sit Sacramentum corporis Christi, illius videlicet, quod visibile, palpabile, mortale, in cruce suspensum est, vocaturquè ipsa immolatio carnis quae Sacerdotis manibus fit, Christi passio, mors, crucifixio, non rei veritate sed significante mysterio. Chrys. in Heb. 10. Hom. Quid ergo nos, nonnè per singulos dies offerrimus, &c. offerrimus quidem sed re­cordationem facientes mortis eius, &c. Hoc quod facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est. Hocenim facite inquit in mei commemorationem. Non aliud Sacrificium sicut Pontifex sed id ipsum sem­per facimus, magis autem recordationem Sacrificij operamur. Theoderet. in cap. 8. Hebr. Cur noui Testa­menci Sacerdotes my sticam Liturgiam seu Sacrificium peragunt, Cum Christus qui est Sacerdos secun­dum ordinem Melchisedech, offerens Sacrificium, efficit vt alia Sacrificia non essent necessaria? Resp. cla­rum est ijs qui sunt eruditi in rebus diuinis, nos non aliud offerre, sed illius vnius & salutaris memoriam peragere. Hocenim nobis praecipit ipse Dominus, hoc facite in meam recordationem: vt per figurarum con­templationem, earum quae pro nobis susceptae sunt perpessionum recordaremur, & in benefactorem bene­uolentiam conseruemus, & futurorum beneficiorum perceptionem expectemus. Theophilact. in Heb. 10. Ip­sum quidem semper offerrimus, imo vero potius memoriam illius oblationis facimus, qua seipse obtulit. C placed A in the margen. Read also Peter Lombard Lombard. Sent. lib. 4. Dist. 12. Quaeritur si quod gerit Sacerdos propriè dicatur Sacrificium, vel immo­latio, & si Christus quotidiè immoletur, vel semel tantum imniolatus sit? ad hoc breuitèr dici potest, Il­lud quod offertur & consecratur à Sacerdote, vocari Sacrificium & oblationem, quià memoria est, & re­presentatio veri Sacrificij, & sanctae immolationis factae in ara crucis. Idem. Semel Christus mortuus est in cruce, ibiquè immolatus est in semetipso. Quotidiè autem immolaturin Sacramento, quià in Sacramento recordatio fit illius, quod factum est semel., and the Enchiridion of Colen Enchir. Coloniens. d. Euchar. Patres non dubitarunt hoc Christi corpus in altari, Sacrificium & salutarem victimam appellare, non ratione Sacrificij, quod est situm in actione Sacerdotis, &c. sed ratione Sacrificij quod in cruce oblatum est semel..

IESVIT.

Secondly, The Priest in the person of Christ, who is D glorious in heauen, or rather Christ being glorious in hea­uen, by the mouth of the Priest, saith, This is my bodie: but a bodie deuoid of bloud without soule, and consequently dead and sencelesse, is not the bodie of Christ, as he is now glorious in heauen, which hath bloud in the veines, and is informed and glorified by a most excellent soule. There­fore Christ glorious in heauen, cannot say truely, that a bo­die void of bloud, sence, and soule is his bodie; but soule, E life, and bloud, must needs follow and concomitate his bodie wheresoeuer it be.

ANSVVER. A

First, The new Testament acknowledgeth no proper sacri­ficing Priests, but Christ Iesus onely, Heb. 7.23.27.28. & ca. 10. 21. Neither is there any word or sentence in our Saui­ours Doctrine, concerning any reall sacrifice, but only of him­selfe vpon the Crosse: neither was any altar Lesseus, d. iust. & iure li. 2. c. 38. n. 11. Quinquè ad perfectum & propriè dictum sa­crificium requirū ­tur. 1. Ex parte mi­nistri vt sit Sacer­dos. 2 Ex parte materiae res ali­qua sensibilis externa, &c. 3. Ex parte formae, illius rei peremptio, vel aliqua alia conueniens mutatio, hoc enim potissimum differt sacrificium ab oblationibus. 4. Ex parte finis vt [...] ad honorem Dei. 5. Ex parte loci, Altare, &c. vsed and ordai­ned by Christ and his Apostles. And if in all reall sacrifices, the matter of the oblation must be really destroyed and chan­ged, and no physicall destruction or change is made in the bo­die B of Christ, or in the elements of Bread and Wine by Tran­substantiation Soto. d. iust. & iur. lib. 9. q. 2. ar. 1. Hac negata veritate Catholica, palàm [...] consequens, mysterium altaris non esse sacrificium.; then Romists haue deuised a reall sacrifice in the new Testament, which hath no diuine Institution.

Secondly, There is no created vertue inhaerent in the Sa­cramentall words Nugnus. in 3. Tho. q. 78. ar. 4. In verbis nihil pro­ducitur superna­turale, nisi sola eleuatio & motio diuina., as they are pronounced by a Priest, to C make the bodie of Christ locally present in the holy Eucha­rist: but when all the words, and all the actions are lawfully performed, which Christ commanded, the holy Ghost is assi­stant to his owne ordinance, and deliuereth vnto faithfull people the crucified Bodie of Christ, and the Bloud of Christ shed for our sinnes vpon the crosse. And although the crucified bodie of our Sauiour was seuered from the soule, yet the deitie euen then remained vnited to that bodie, which then was not dead in regard of merit and satisfaction: and all they which receiue that bodie by operatiue faith, are made parta­kers of the merit and satisfaction thereof, and by this receiuing, D are more and more ingraffed into Christ.

IESVIT.

Thirdly, If vnder the forme of bread were onely the bodie of Christ, and his soule and bloud were not by con­comitancie there, the communicants should receiue the body of Christ, but not truely Christ, as our Aduersaries grant. Caluin. li. 4. [...]. ca. 7. nu. 35. Ibid. nu. 74. Caluin specially saying, Quis sanus & sobrius Christi E corpus Christum esse sibi persuadeat? And againe, Ne fando quidem auditum est corpus Christi, aut sanguinem Deum & hominem appellari. But Fathers [Page 466] affirme most constantly, that not onely the bodie of Christ, A but also Ambr. l. [...] qui init. In illo Sacramento Chri­stus est. Hilar. l. 8. d. Trinit. Nos vere verbum carnem ci­bo Dominico su­mimus. Cyrill. A­lexand. l. 4. in Ioh. c. 15. Per hanc be­nedictionē Myste­rij ipsum filium Dei suscipimus. Cyrill. Hierosol. Catech. Myst. 5. Chrys. Hom. 83. in cap. 26. Math. & Hom. 24. in 1. ad Cor. Christ himselfe is in the Sacrament; that we take in the Dominicall refection, The word made flesh; that by the consecration of the Mysteries, wee receiue the verie Sonne of God; that vnder the forme of Bread, we lodge within vs the Soueraigne King; and that we see Christ, feele Christ, eate Christ, Non regium puerum, sed ip­sum vnigenitum Dei filium. An hundred other places might be brought, where the Fathers call the consecrated B Bread Christ; and consequently, they did not thinke there was the meere Bodie, without Blood and Soule, seeing, as Caluin doth confesse, Jt is an absurd manner of speech, to terme Christ the meere bodie of Christ; and such a forme of speech was neuer heard of hitherto in the world: Ergo, Concomitancie, that is, Christs reall and entire Bodie, Soule, Flesh, Blood, to be vnder the forme of Bread, was acknowledged by the Fathers. C

ANSVVER.

It is granted, that worthie Communicants in the holy Eu­charist, receiue Christ, Ioh. 6. 33, 35, 48. but Sacramentall ea­ting his flesh, and drinking his blood, is the meanes, by which they are vnited and incorporated with Christ himselfe: there­fore the Obiection, to wit, if the soule and blood were not in Christs bodie by Concomitancie, Communicants should re­ceiue the bodie of Christ, but not truely Christ, is inconse­quent: D because by receiuing the one, they receiue the other, and the former is the instrumentall cause of the latter. So in this kinde of spirituall Concomitancie, neither the Fathers, nor Cal­uin, nor we, nor you, need be at any difference.

IESVIT.

This Principle, which is no lesse certaine than the true reall Presence supposed, I inferre the lawfulnesse of Com­munion E vnder one kinde, (to wit, vnder the sole forme of Bread) by this Argument: If Communion vnder one kinde be not against the substance, either of Christs Insti­tution [Page 467] or of his Sacrament, or his Precept, or of the A Practise of the Primitiue Church; it is lawfull, iustifi­able, and for iust Reasons may be commanded by the Church.

This Proposition is true, because there neither are other causes of dislike, that may not be reduced to these foure; neither doe Christs Institution, or Sacrament, or Precept, or the Primitiue practise, bind vs to keepe them further, than in substance, the accidentall Circumstances of Insti­tutions, B Sacraments, Precepts, Primitiue Customes, being variable, according to the variable disposition of things, vnto which the Church Militant in this life is subiect. Now I assume, Concomitancie being supposed, it may be made euident, that Communion vnder one kind is not a­gainst the substance, either of Christs Institution, or of the Sacrament, or of his Precept, or of his Primitiue practise: For the substance of these foure Obligations is one and the same, to wit, that we be truly and really partakers of C the Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour; which is fully done by Communion vnder one kind, as I will shew in the foure consequent Sections.

ANSWER.

If Concomitancie (which is stiled in this place by the name of a Principle) were graunted, yet Communion in one kind is D not iustifiable: For although it depriue not people of Christs Bloud, as it is a bodily part, Arist. d. part. Animal. lib. 2. cap. 2. Partium simularium aliae molles & hu­midae, &c. sanguis, sanies, adeps. contained in the veines, yet it depriueth them of the Bloud of Christ, as it was shed, and poured out, and offered in Sacrifice for them.

To the maine Argument I answer, denying the Assumption. For Communion in one kind is repugnant to the first Institu­tion of the Eucharist by Christ, who hallowed two materiall Elements, Bread and Wine; appointed them a distinct signifi­cation, deliuered them indifferently to all the Communicants, and annexed a Promise to the reception of the one, as well as E to the sumption of the other.

Secondly, It is repugnant to the expresse Precept of Christ, saying, Drinke yee all of this; and to S. Pauls Precept Cyprian. d. Coen. [...]. Lex esum [...] vt [...]., 1. Cor. 11. 28.

[Page 468] Thirdly, The practise of the holy Apostles 1. Cor. 10.21. cap. 11.23.26., and of the A Primitiue Church [...]. Hie­rarch. cap. 3. [...] Calicem omnibus impartiens. Iustin. Martir. A polog. 2. Distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt [...] panem vinum & aquam. [...] Epist. ad Philadelph, vnus panis omnibus confractus, [...] & vnum poculum omnibus distributum. Tertul. d. Cor. mil. cap. 3. [...]. Epist. 54. & 56. & 63. in Calice Dominico san­ctificando & populo ministrando, &c. Aug. in [...] 57. — à cuius Sacrisicij sa nguine in alimentum su­mendo, non solum nemo prohibetur sed ad bibendum omnes exhortantur qui volunt habere vitam. [...]. 1. Cor. hom. 11. & sup. 2. Cor. hom. 18. [...] sup. soph. cap. 3. Sacerdotes qui Eucharistiae seruiunt, & sanguinem Domini populis diuidunt. Hist. Trip. lib. 9. cap. 30. [...]. d. Octau. Pasch. Quid sit sanguis agni noniam audiendo sed bibendo didicistis., is against it.

Fourthly, The people which receiue in one kind, receiue B onely a Moitie, and piece, but not the whole and entire Sa­crament

IESVIT. § 2. Communion vnder one kind, not against the substance of the Institution of Christ.

DIuine Institution, is an Action of God, whereby hee C giues being vnto things, with reference vnto some speciall end. This end is twofold, the one corporall and temporall, for which God hath instituted agreeable & [...] meanes; that men may be borne into this world, he did institute marriage; and for maintenance of the said life, being had, hee or dained many sorts of meate. The other end is spirituall, for which God hath instituted Sacra­ments: as for the first obtaining of grace and spirituall D life, the Sacrament of Baptisme and Penance; and for the preseruing of grace, and increasing therein, particu­larly the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

That a man bee bound to vse the Jnstitution of God, two things are required: First, that the end thereof bee necessarie, and hee bound to indeuour the attaining there­of. Hence it is, that though marriage bee the Jnstitution of God, appointed to propagate mankinde, yet euery man is E not bound to marry, because he is not bound to propagate mankinde, when there be others that do abundantly complic with that duty; to which mankind is in general bound, mul­tiplicamini Gen. 1. 28. & replete terram. Secondly, when the end of [Page 469] tion is such, as euery man must indeauour the attayning A thereof; to the end that a man be bound to vse that institu­tion, it is further required, that the thing instituted be ne­cessarie for attaining of that end: for if there be other meanes ordained, sufficient for the attaining of that end, man is not bound to vse such particular diuine instituti­ons. For example, man is bound to maintaine his corporall life, so long as nature will permit, and to this end God created varietie of fruites; yet no man is bound by diuine B institution to eate fruites, there being other meanes institu­ted for the maintenance of life.

Applying this to our purpose, it is apparent, that by force of diuine institution, no man is bound to vse Commu­nion vnder both kinds. For though the end why Christ did institute the Sacrament in both kinds be necessarie, and all must indeauour the attaining thereof, to wit, maintenance and increase of grace, the life of the soule; yet there be other meanes by which we may attaine to this end. Whence it is C that learned Diuines hold, that the Sacrament of the Eu­charist Theologi omnes communiter cum D. Tho. 3. p. quaest. 3. art. 3. is not Necessarium necessitate Medij, as they speake, that is the vse thereof is not a necessarie meanes for the maintenance of spirituall life, but a man wanting meanes of Sacred Communion, may by other meanes pre­serue himselfe in the state of grace. And though we should suppose that actuall Communion were a necessary meanes to preserue spirituall life, yet Communion vnder one kind is D abundantly sufficient thereunto. For the Sacrament in the sole forme of Bread, contayning the Author and fountaine of life whole and intire, according to Body, Soule, Bloud, and his infinite person, is abundantly sufficient for the refection of the soule, yea no lesse sufficient than Com­munion vnder both kinds. For this one kind [...] within it nothing lesse, than what is contained in both: and Christ promiseth life to sole manducation, Qui manducat E me & ipse viuit propter me, and vnto the sole reception of his Body vnder the forme of Bread, Panis quem ego Ioh. 6. v. 58. [...] v. 55. & 59. dabo caro mea est pro mundi vita & qui manducat [Page 470] hunc panem viuet in aeternum: If the Tree of life in the A Gen. 2.9. midst of Paradise, if the Manna of the Jewes (the Bread of Angells) did suffice to nourish the body without Drinke, Exod. 16.15. Why should we deny this soule-nourishing sufficiencie vnto the sole body of Christ, were the same alone in the Bread: but specially being there conioyned with his soule and his most precious bloud?

ANSWER.

FIrst, the ground of the obiection laid by the Iesuit in cer­taine B comparisons, taken from Marriage, Meatand Drinke, is of no consequence: for as touching Wedlocke, the same (presupposing humane Propagation) is necessarie, both Necessi­tate Medij, and Necessitate praecepti, that the generation of man may be morally lawfull, Heb. 13.4. so likewise presupposing, that Christians doe receiue the holy Eucharist, it is necessarie Necessitate finis, or Medij, & necessitate praecepti, That they receiue the same, as the Author appointed it to be receiued; which was not in one kind, but in both. And as touching Food, it is necessa­ry, that man receiue it in some kind or other, for the sustenance C of his life: but because God hath left it to the libertie of mans Election to vse which kind he liketh, and hath not by law, or precept, obliged him to any one kind in speciall, thereforeman is free in choosing his materiall Food, and obtaineth the end of Food, and obserueth the law of his Maker, when he orderly vseth any kind thercof. But in the matter of the holy Eucha­rist, as God hath not made it adiaphorous for man to change the Elements, substituting Water and Broath, or Flesh in the stead of Bread and Wine: so likewise he hath not permitted it D to humane discretion, to omit or vse the Sacramentall signes, but hath by expresse precept, obliged his Church to thevse of one signe, as well as the other.

But I wonder that the Iesuit in this discursiue preamble, would vse an instance from our naturall foode, than which nothing by wayof inference doth more expresly refute him. Can he in the Sacrament make mention of Food, and not con­sider that our Sauiours intent in the institution was, to propor­tion our Spirituall food to our Corporall? In our bodily nou­rishment, haue we not need of drinke as well as meat? Did E not our Sauiour therfore adde the Cup to the Bread, and equal­ly blessed both? How dare they then make the repast of our soules, a dry banquet? And although God neuer bound any man to eate all kind of meat, yet he neuer forbad any man all kind of drinke. [Page 471] Secondly, If the matter or materiall part of compounded A things belongs to their substance Aquin. p. 1. q. 75 ar. 4. Scheibler. Metaphys. l. 1. c. 6. p. 2. in habentibus materiam, mate­ria est pars essen­tiae. Suar. Metaph. disp. 36. sect. 2. Pe­rerius lib. 6. nat. Phil. cap. 6. 7. 8. Iandun. Metaph. 7. q. 12., then the defalcation of one kind is against the integritie of the substance of the Eucharist. For the Element of Wine, vnto which answereth the distribu­tion and reception thereof, is a medietie or halfe part of the matter of the holy Communion; and if the taking away there­of, is not against the substance of Christs Institution, then like­wise the taking away of Bread, which is the other part, and the retaining of Wine onely, is not against the same: for the blood of Christ is as noble a part of Christ, and hath as great vertue, necessitie, and commendation in holy Scripture, as his bodie B strictly taken; and consequently, the outward signe heereof, is as necessarie for all the members of the Church, as the ex­ternall signe of his bodie.

But against this, the Iesuit argueth as followeth.

If Lay people may attaine the end for which Christ ordained the Eucharist, without receiuing in both kindes, then Commu­nion vnder one kinde is not against the substance of Christs In­stitution. C

But Lay people may attaine the end, &c. to wit, maintenance, and increase of grace, by Communion in one kinde, because one kinde containeth in it nothing lesse than what is contained in both, Ioh. 6. v. 55, 58, 59. Ergo,

Communion vnder one kinde is not against the substance of Christs Institution.

ANSWER. D

The sequele and assumption of this Argument are denied. First, Communion vnder one kinde, may be of the substance of Christs Institution, although the end and fruit of the holy Eu­charist might bee receiued by other meanes: for as in the Sa­crament of Baptisme, the end is regeneration and remission of sinnes Aug. Ep. 90. & Epist. 157. Greg. Nyssen. Orat. d. Bapt. Chrysoft. in Gen. Hom. 40. Ambros. Apol. Dauid. cap. 13., Acts 22. 16. Tit. 3. 5. and this end, in some cafe, may bee obtained without aspersion of water, as appeareth in Baptismo sanguinis August. d. Ciuit. Dei. lib. 13. cap. 7. Quicunque non recepto rege­nerationis E lauacro, pro Christi consessione moriuntur tantum eis valet ad dimittenda peccata quantum si ablucrentur, sacro fonte Baptismatis. Lembard 4 d. 4. D. Aquin. 3. q. 68. ar. 2. & q. 87. ar. 1. Bellarm. d. Bap. lib. 1. cap. 6. Greg. Val. Suares, Nugnus, Henriques, lib 2. cap. 34. Petigian. in. 4. d. 4. q. 3. ar. 1. [...]. d Sacrament. d. Bapt. Disp. 2. punct. 2. Yrebarn. Cabrer. Fauentin. & aiij., when Martyrs decease, without Sacra­mentall [Page 472] Baptisme: and yet to be washed or sprinkled with wa­ter, A is of the substance of Christs Institution; so likewise Com­munion in both kindes, is of the substance of Christs Institu­tion, although the end and fruit of the holy Eucharist, to wit, continuance and increase of grace, may be obtained by spiritu­all manducation alone, without Sacramentall.

If the former illation of Romists were good, it will follow likewise from thence, that receiuing of Bread in the Eucharist, is not of the substance of Christs Institution: for whole and intire Christ, according to bodie, and soule, and infinite per­son, is in the blood alone, if the Popish Doctrine of Conco­mitancie B be true: and if this be granted (as of necessitie it must) then Romists may mangle and transforme the holy Sacrament at their pleasure.

Secondly, The end and fruit of the Sacrament is either com­mon to the holy Eucharist, with other meanes of Grace Aug. Epist. ad Bonifac. citatur à [...] in 3. p. Tho. d. Euchar. q. 27. ar. 5. pa. 371. Nulliest aliquatenus ambigendum, tunc vnumquenque fidelium corporis sanguinisque Domini participem fieri, quando in Baptismate membrum Christi corporis efficitur, nec alie­nari ab illius panis calicisque consortio, etiamsi antequam panem illum comedat, & calicem bibat, de hoc saeculo, in vnitate corporis Christi constitutus abscedat., or else proper to it onely.

To eate the flesh and drinke the blood of the Sonne of God, C by recognition of Christs Passion, and by Faith in the same, may be an effect of the Gospell preached, Ioh. 6. 54. But to eate the same flesh and blood, communicated more distinctly and effectually by visible seales, of the couenant of the new Testament, is an end and fruit peculiar and proper to the holy Eucharist, 1. Cor. 10. 16. A man may haue the same inheri­tance bestowed on him, by the word and writing of the Donor, yet when the same is confirmed by the seale of the Donor, the donation is of greater validitie; and if by Law or D custome, two seales should be appointed, the apposition of one is not of equall force and validitie to the apposition of both: so likewise, because the Sonne of God made choyce of two outward signes, namely, Bread and Wine, to represent and ap­ply his Passion and Oblation, and withall commanded the common vse and reception of both, saying, Drinke ye all of this: and also annexed a speciall promise and blessing to both these outward signes, ioyntly vsed: therefore the vse & sumption of one of these without the other, cannot haue so great force Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. m. 4. ar. 1. §. 1. In quantum efficacia respicit signatum, & non contentum vtraque (species) est de integritate: quia sumpto hoc Sacramento digne, in vtraque specie, [...] est effectus, vnionis corporis mystici cum capite quam sumptio sub altera., to apply the effect & fruit of the Sacrament, as the vse & reception E of both. And as in concauses, or partiall causes, the action of [Page 473] the one, cannot produce the effect without the other; and as A when two keyes are prouided to open a locke, the same is not opened by one of them onely: so likewise Christ Iesus, ha­uing instituted and sanctified two signes, for the more propor­tionable and effectuall application of his Bodie, and Blood, it is grosse presumption in man to mutilate and cut off a part of that bodie which the wisedome of Christ hath framed in due and beautifull proportion, and to diuide that which God hath ioy­ned together, and without warrant from Gods reuealed word, to attribute a totall effect, to a partiall meanes and cause.

IESVIT. B

Hence it is apparent, that without any iust cause, some Protestants inueigh against the Councell of Constance, as Concil. Con­stant. sess. 13. professing to contradict the Precept of Christ, because it decreed, That the Sacrament may bee lawfully giuen vn­der one kind, Non obstante quod Christus in vtraque specie illud instituerit, & Apostolis administrauerit: Notwithstanding Christs Institution and Administration C thereof in both kinds, to his Disciples. This their bitter­nesse proceeds from zeale without knowledge, not di­stinguishing the Jnstitution of God from his Precept, which are very distinct: for the Precept of both kinds (if Christ gaue any) doth bind, whether both kinds be neces­sarie for the maintenance of mans soule in grace, or no; but the Jnstitution in both kinds, doth not binde further than the thing instituted, to wit, Communion vnder both kinds is necessarie for the maintaining of spirituall life, D for which, one kind being sufficient, as I haue shewed, Christs Institution of both kinds, doth not inforce the vse of both. If God should haue commanded the vse both of meate and drinke, euery man should be bound, not onely to eate, but also to drinke, though he had no necessitie thereof; but now seeing God hath not giuen such a Precept, a man that can liue by meate without euer drinking, is not bound E to drinke, non obstante, that God did institute both ea­ting and drinking for the preseruation of life in euerie man.

ANSWER. A

The Councell of Constance is iustly censured, for presu­ming to alter and disanull the ordinance of Christ Ambros. in 1. Cor. 11. Indignū dicit esse Domi­no, qui alitèr my­sterium celebrat, quam ab eo tradi­tum est. Non enim potest deuotus es­se, qui alitèr praesu­mit, quam datum est ab Authore.; for if it be flagitious amongst men to alter and contradict the lawfull Will of a Testator, Galat. 3.15. shall it not be much more vn­lawfall to alter the Testament of the Sonne of God, who dis­posed to the common people his Bloud, as well as his Bodie, saying, Drinke ye all of this, Math. 26, 27. and except yee eate the flesh, and drinke the bloud of the man, &c. Ioh. 6.53.

And the words of the said Synod are most presumptious, B Concil. Constant. Can. 13. pag. 349. col. 2. Licet Chri­stus post coenā in­stituerit, & suis Discipulis admi­nistrauerit sub v­tra (que) specie panis & vini hoc vene­rabile Sacramen­tū: tamen hoc nō obstante, &c. Licet in Primitiua Ecclesia huiusmodi Sacramentū reciperetur, à fidelibus sub vtra (que) specie, tamen haec consuetudo, &c. Dicere quod hanc consuetudinē & legē obseruare sit sacrilegū, aut illicitū cen­seri debet, erroneū, & pertinacitèr asserentes opositū praemissorū, tanquā Haeretici arcendi sunt, & grauitèr puniendi, &c. for this they pronounce, Although Christ, after supper, instituted and administred to his Disciples vnder both kindes, &c. And although in the Primitiue Chruch, this Sacrament was receiued of Beleeuers in both kinds, yet notwithstanding, the contrarie custome for Laicks to receiue in one kind, is with good reason brought in, and they are Heretickes which hold this, sacrilegious or vn­lawfull.

But what are these men in comparison of Christ and his C Apostles, and of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church? If men may thus twit Christ and his Apostles, what shall become of all religion? The sole and totall rule to guide the Church in the matter of the holy Eucharist, is Christs Institution and pra­ctise, recorded by the Euangelists, and testified by the Apostles, and the Primitiue Church in their doctrine and practise fol­lowed this rule (as some of our learned Aduersaries ingeni­ously confesse Cassand. Con­sult. 22. In Eccle­sia Latina, mille amplius annis te­nuit, vt tam popu­lo quam clero, in celebratione mis­sarum post myste­riorum consecrati­onē seorsum cor­pus & seorsum sanguis Domini preberetur. Gerard. Lorich. d. public. miss. prorog. Ruard Tapper, ar 15. pag 218. Aquinas. Com. Ioh. 6. Secundum antiquam Ecclesiae E consuetudinem, omnes sicut communicabant corpori, ità communicabant & sanguini: quod etiàm adhuc in quibusdam Ecclesijs seruatur Arboreus. Com. in Ioh. 6. Nec addubito, quin in Primitiua Ecclesia communicarent omnes tum Laici tum Sacerdotes sub vtraquè specie..) If therefore Christ Iesus and his Apostles, and after these, the Primitiue Church administred the Communi­on D to lay people in both kinds (as this Synod confesseth;) and on the contraie, nothing is extant in holy Writ, or in the monu­ments of the Fathers, to testifie that Christ and his Apostles retracted or altered this first practise: What audacious sacri­ledge was it in the Prelates of Constance, vpon their owne pri­uate and childish Gerson d. com. sub vtraquè. De­nar. 2. Primum, periculum in effusione. Secundum, in deportatione de loco ad locum. Tertium, in vasorum sordidatione, &c. Quartum, in longis barbis laicorum. Itèm, quod tanta esset dignitas laicorum circà sumptionem corporis Christi, sicut & Sacerdotum. to. 1. pag. 528. vid. plura. reasons, to cancell Christs last Will and Te­stament, and to violate the sacred precept and ordinance of the Sonne of God?

[Page 475] But our Aduersarie laboureth by a distinction of Institution A and Precept, to plaister the vlcerous Doctrine of the [...] of Constance, saying, or implying, That although Christ did in­stitute the holy Eucharist in two kinds, yet he gaue no precept for the vse of it in two kinds. But this plaister of sig-leaues healeth not the wound, for there is both an institution and a precept for both kinds, and more expressely for the cup than for the bread: for Christ said expressely and literally, Drinke yee all of this, whereas he said not so literally and expressely, eat yee all of this. Besides, his institution is a vertuall and inter­pretatiue B precept, as appeareth by S. Paul 1. Cor. 11.23. And Christ did institute the Eucharist in two kinds, that people might receiue and vfe it in two kinds.

Also, if the manner of the institution prooueth not the manner of the vse, then the Eucharist may be vsed in another manner (I meane in things substantiall) than as it was instituted: and if this, then it may be vsed in wine onely without bread, or in broth, or in flesh, for we haue no direction or rule for the manner, of greater authoritie than the institution.

Lastly, diuine institution doth not only signifie an action of God, whereby he giueth being vnto things, with reference to C their end, (in which manner the Iesuit sinisterly defineth it Accursius. praef. sup. Instit. Instini­an. Institutiones sunt praeceptiones quibus instituun­tur, & docentur homines, &c.) but it signifieth also a decree, rule, precept, and information, concerning the vse and practise of that which God hath ordai­ned. Now our Sauiour, when he ordained the holy Eucharist, in regard of the being and entitie thereof, he withall conioy­ned the vse of the same as a necessarie condition, to make it operatiue and effectuall to his people. For euen as in Baptisme, although the Word and Element constitute the Sacrament, in regard of the definition Aug sup. Ioh. tr. 80. Accedit ver­bū ad elementum, & fit sacramentū., yet the same is no Baptisme Aquinas. 3. q. 66. ar. 1. Sacramē ­tum no [...] in ipsa a qua, sed in applicatione a quae ad hominem, quae est ablutio. to D vs, vntill the Word & Water be applied to the subiect by ablu­tion: so likewise in the holy Eucharist, the words and ele­ments make the definition, but the vse and application, accor­ding to the manner taught by Christ, giues it a Sacramentall vertue and operation in respect of vs Inchoatiuè vel inceptiuè Sacra­mentum antè vsum. Consummatiuè & perfectiuè non est Sacramentum antè vsum..

IESVIT. §. 3. E Communion vnder one kind, not against the substance of the Sacrament.

A Sacrament of the new Testament, being a visible efficatious signe of inuisible grace, foure things [Page 476] are necessarie to concurre to the substantiall constitution A thereof, which I will set downe in order, and together shew that they are all found in the Eucharist giuen vnder one kind.

First, there is required some element, that is a visible and sensible thing or action, without which, no Sacrament can subsist, tearmed by Diuines Materia Sacramenti. This substantiall part is not wanting in the Sacrament giuen in one kind, in which kind there is consecrated bread, visible and sensible in the accidents thereof, and manducation also, B an action visible and appar ant to sence.

ANSVVER.

THis quadripartite argument (at least in the three formost branches) is meerly sophistical, & indeed against common sence: as if one should question, whether a man without legs or armes were a perfect entire man, according to the first creation of mankind, & the perpetual succeeding law of nature, C not erring? The Iesuit should answere thus: This is a suffici­ent and perfect man, for the other members which he hath, as head, brest, backe, &c. are not of the substance of humane na­ture. In my replie, I need adde no more, but smile. And yet to answere his particulars: First in euerie Sacrament there is re­quired not onely a sensible action, but also a visible and materi­all signe Aug. ad Maxi­min. lib. 3. cap. 22. Lombar. 4. d. 1. Sa­cramentum est in­uisibilis gratiae vi­sibilis forma. Hu­go. lit. F., and therefore (to speake by the way) some of the seuen which Romists number in their List or Kalender, are no Sacraments. But in the holy Eucharist there is a double vi­sible element, and materiall visible signe Idem. dist. 4. lit. F. Iren. lib. 4. ca. 32. Tertull. d. Re­sur. carn. ca. 8. Iu­stin. Mart. colloq. cum Tryph: & A­pol. 2. Aug. in psal. 3. Cypr. Ep 63., to wit, Bread and D Wine, Math. 26.26, 27. Luc. 22. 19, 20. 1. Cor. 11.23.25. and these outward elements being two in number, and diuided the one from the other, were distinctly and seuerally distributed by our Sauiour, and were receiued by the communicants apart, the one of them after the other: and although they make but one Sacrament in regard of the definition, as similarie and dis­similarie parts make but one bodie, yet there is a diuersitie and pluralitie both in their matter and forme Bonacin. d. Sa­cra. d. Euchar. disp. 4. p. 4. propos. 1. In Sacramento Eu­charistiae E est diuersitas & pluralitas materiae & formae, cum alia sit materia & forma corporis Christi, & alia [...] materia & forma sanguinis. Alex. Hall. 4. q. 10. m. 3. ar. 2., and a reason why they must be two, and not one indiuiduall signe.

IESVIT. A

The second thing required to the substance of the Sa­crament, is, Verbum, the Word; that is, a forme of speech, shewing the diuine and supernaturall purpose, vnto which the element is consecrated. Neither is that part wanting in the Sacrament giuen vnder one kind, which is consecrated by the words of Christ, This is my bodie: and the Theo­logicall B Principle taken out of S. Augustine verified, Aug. Tract. 18. in Ioan. Accedit verbum ad elementum & fit Sacramentum.

ANSWER.

As the outward elements are two in number, so likewise a double act of blessing and consecration must passe vpon them Palud. 4. d. 9. q. 1. ar. 1. Caiet. 3. q. 80 ar. 12. Suares. to. 3. disp. 43. sect. 3. Reginald. d. poen. li. 29. nu. 13. Cha­merot. d. Euchar. cap. 6. Dub. 1. Nugnus. in 3. q. 74. ar. 1. Conclus. 2.; for otherwise, that part which wanteth benediction, is not a sa­cramentall signe, but a common creature: and if any signe be omitted, then the Sacrament wanteth integritie of parts. C

IESVIT.

The third thing is signification, euerie Sacrament sig­nifying some diuine effect of grace, which God worketh by the application thereof; and the sensible signe, euen by nature hath as S. Augustine noteth, some proportion and Aug. Epist. 23. ad Bonifac. analagie to signifie that diuine effect, which to produce it D is assumed by Gods omnipotencie as an Instrument. This Aug. Epist. 23. sacred signification which the holy Eucharist hath, is of three kinds, and all three are found in the Sacrament giuen vnder one kind. First, this Sacrament is a signe of spiritu­all food, for the nourishment and refection of the soule, which signification is manifestly found in Communion vn­der one kind, for the Eucharist doth signifie this effect of spirituall nutrition, because it is a signe of Christ the Bread E of Life, the food of Angels, the fountaine of grace: but by the sole forme of bread, Christ is signified as present ac­cording to his most sacred bodie, and consequently as most [Page 478] sufficient to feed and refresh the Soule. Another significa­tion A of this Sacrament, is vnion and coniunction betweene the Faithfull, as being members of the same Bodie where­of Christ is Head, and fellow members one with another, as S. Paul declares: which coniunction, the Sacrament in Rom. 12. 4. & 5. 1. Cor. 12. 12. the forme of Bread, doth signifie. For Bread being a com­pound of many graines of Wheat, massed together in one Loafe, and also made of Flower and Water mingled one with another, signifies the perfect vnion, both of the B Church with Christ, and of the Faithfull that are in the Church one with another; as S. Paul testifies, Vnum cor­pus 1. Cor. 10. v. 17. sumus quotquot de vno Pane participamus; where he makes no mention of Wine, the Sacrament in the forme of Bread being alone able to shew and worke this signification.

This Sacrament doth also signifie the Passion and Death of our Sauiour, which Death and Passion is shew­ed and represented by Communion vnder one kind. For C receiuing the Sacrament in the forme of Wine onely, wee haue a sufficient ground to remember the Bloud of Christ, that was in his Passion shed and seperated from his Bo­die. Likewise, by participating of the consecrated Bread, wee may liuely conceiue the Bodie of Christ, as it was de­priued of the most precious Bloud, by the effusion thereof on the Crosse: whereupon Christ (as S. Paul testifies) did 1. Cor. 11. v. 14, 15. after the consecration of each kind, particularly recom­mend D the memorie of his Passion, as knowing that in each of them alone, was a sufficient Monument and me­moriall thereof.

ANSWER.

Significations may be found in Types and figures, being no Sacraments; as in a Vine and Branches, a naturall Humane Bo­die, a materiall House, or Temple, a Lambe led before the shea­rer, E and the like: but yet, because they are otherwise in the Sacrament, both in regard of a more perfect and liuely repre­sentation, and also because a speciall Promise of Diuine assi­stance and grace is annexed to the Sacramentall signes, vsed and receiued, according to Christs Institution, which belon­geth [Page 479] not to other signes and figures, therefore it is inconse­quent, A to say one Element receiued alone, signifies as much in substance, as both: Ergo, the vse of one Element, is as profita­ble and effectuall, as the vse and reception of both.

But if the obiection be reduced to forme, the defect will be more apparent.

If there is the same signification, of one single Element, which there is of both, then there is the same benefit obtained by receiuing one, which is obtained by receiuing both.

But there is the same signification of one single Element, which B there is of both, to wit, spirituall Food, vnion of the Faithfull, and Christs passion: Ergo,

There is the same benefit obtayned, by receiuing in one kind, as in both.

I answer: First, denying the consequence of the Maior Pro­position. For although there were the same signification in one Element, which is of both, yet there is not equall benefit rea­ped by receiuing one, as is reaped by receiuing both; because the promise of Grace is annexed to the receiuing both, and C not to the receiuing of one without the other: for when a pro­mise is made vpon condition of a duty to be performed, the promise is not fulfilled, but vpon obseruing the condition. Now Christ hauing instituted the Sacrament as a seale of his Couenant, and appointed the same to be receiued in both kinds (as his Institution shewes) Ferus. in Ioh. 6. In institutione huius Sacramenti Christus impera­tiue loquitur, acci­pite commedite, hoc facite. the Church cannot expect that Christ should fulfill his promise, in giuing his flesh and blood by the Sacrament, vnlesse the Church obserue his ordinance, and doe that which he appointed. Also, obedience is better D than Sacrifice, 1. Sam. 15. 22. but when we administer and receiue in both kinds, we obey Christ, saying, Drinke ye all of this; and we disobey, when we doe otherwise. Therefore al­though there were the same signification of one Element, which is of both, yet the same benefit is not reaped by recei­uing one, which is obtained by receiuing both.

Secondly, to the assumption I answer, that there is a more perfect and liuely representation Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. m. 3. ar. 2. Etsi Christus ho­mo naturali qua­dam similitudine representatur v­traque specie: non tame ex institutio­ne, signatur vtra­que: sed secundum carnem specie pa­nis, secundum sanguinem specie vini. of spirituall feeding and refection, and of coniunction of the faithfull, and of Christs E death and Sacrifice vpon the crosse, by both the signes, than by one: and pouring out of the wine Greg. Dial. li. 4. ca. 58. Eius sanguis in ora fidelium funditur., doth in a cleerer manner represent and signifie the effusion of Christs bloud, and also the separation of his body and soule; and there is a more perfect [Page 480] c Cyprian. ep. 63. in Calice Dominico & plebi ministrando, non hoc faciunt, quod Iesus Christus Dominus & Deus noster huiua Sacri­ficij Atuhor & Doctor, fecit & docuit. similitude of nourishment in Bread and Wine Cyprian. li. 2. ep. 3. siue epist. 63. Calix Domini­cus sic bibentes in­ebriat, vt sobrios faciat, vt mentes ad spiritalem sa­pientiam redigat, vt a sapore isto sae­culari, ad intelle­ctum Dei vnus­quisque resipiscat. Chrys. in Ioh. Hom 45. Hic sanguis facit, vt imago in nobis regia [...]: Hic sanguis pulchritudinem atque nobilitatem animae quam semper irregat & notrit, languescere non sinit, &c. Hic mysticus sanguis Daemo­nes procul pellit, Angelos & Angelorum Dominum ad nos allicit Daemones enim cum Dominicum sangui­nem B in nobis vident, in fugam vertuntur, Angeli autem procurrunt Iren. li. 5. ca. 1. Ruits. Contr. Theol. 32. pa. 152. Species panis sola non significat gratiam vt reficientem animam, [...], sed partialiter. Alex. Hel. 4. q. 10. m. 4. ar. 1. §. 1 Reade [...], together, than A in Bread alone, Eccles. 4. 9. so likewise two Elements repre­sent more than one, and nourish more than one, and vnite more than one. Otherwise, if the representation of one Element, were equall to the representation of both, to what purpose should our Sauiour institute a Sacrament in two kinds, which (according to Papists, who will seeme wiser than God) Arboreus Sap Ioh. 6. Caro Christi [...] animam, sed sanguis viuisicat animam, & emundat conscientiam nostram ab operibus mortuis. is as sufficient in one kind, as in both?

IESVIT.

The fourth thing required to the substance of a Sacra­ment, is Causalitie, to wit, to worke in the soule the Spi­rituall effects it signifies. This Causalitie cannot be wanting C to the Sacrament vnder one kind, wherein is contayned the fountaine of Spirituall life. For, the cause why the Sacra­ment in both kinds giueth grace, and refresheth the soule, is, That Christ is assistant vnto them, bound by his promise at the presence of sensible signes, to worke the proportiona­ble spirituall effects in disposed soules. But Christ is in the Sacrament vnder the forme of Bread, and he is able through infinite power, and bound by inuiolable promise, to D worke the effect of grace, preseruing vnto life eternall, the worthy participant of this Sacrament, vnder the forms Ioan. 6.55. of Bread, Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aeter­num. Not any doubt then may be made but the Sacrament in one kind is full, entire, compleate in substance; and by participation thereof, prepared consciences doe receiue the benefite of celestiall fauour, that conserueth the life of the soule, with daily increase in perfection. E

ANSVVER.

The summe of this obiection is:

There is the same power of causing Grace, in one signe receiued [Page 481] alone, as in both; because Christ, the Fountaine of Grace, is re­ceiued A in one signe alone, Ioh. 6. 51.

Therefore the receiuing of one signe alone, is as sufficient, and profitable, as the sumption of both.

The Antecedent of this Argument is denyed. And the Scripture, Ioh. 6. 51. saith not, Whosoeuer eateth Sacramentall Bread, without Wine, shall liue for euer; but if any eat this Bread which came downe from Heauen, to wit, Christ Iesus in­carnate Hilar. d. Trin. lib. 10. se panem hic dicit, &c. Chrys. in Ioh. Ho. 45. Pa­nem vitae seipsum appellat, &c. Ferus in Ioh. 6. Hic pa­nis de quo Chri­stus hic loquitur, nihil aliud est quā Incarnatio, Passio, & Meritū Christi, atque adeo Chri­stus ipse, cum om­nibus quae habet quae fecit & passus est. Caietan. Ioh. 6. Primo tractat de seipso vt est panis vitae: Deinde de Passione sua futura, secundum quam est cibus & potus vitae. Ibid. Sermo formalis non est de Sacramento, sed de re Sa­cramenti, C de Fonte Sacramenti. Ibid. Non est ad literam sermo de manducare & bibere Sacramentum Eu­charistiae, sed de manducare & bibere Mortem Christi., shall liue for euer. And then it followeth, Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, you shall not B haue life in you, Ioh. 6.53. Now let the Romist chuse which Exposition hee pleaseth. If our Sauiour, in these last words, speaketh of Sacramentall and Spirituall eating ioyntly, then Communion in both kinds is necessarie to life eternall; and if he speake of Spirituall eating only, by Faith, then this Scrip­ture prooueth not the necessitie of receiuing eyther Bread or Wine Ferus, in Ioh. 6. Dicere quod sine corporali perceptione Sacramenti, nulli possit contingere vita, admodum durum, imo temerarium, & falsum est. Ibid. Manducatur corpus Christi in Sacramento: & haec quidem manducatio non simpliciter necessaria est vt prior, plures enim etiam sine hac saluati sunt, & saluantur: sed tamen ita necessaria est, vt non con­temnatur vel negligatur suo tempore., and much lesse prooueth it, that there is the power of causing Grace, in receiuing Bread alone.

IESVIT. §. 4. Communion vnder one kind, not D against Christ his Precept.

ALthough Communion vnder both kinds pertaine not to the substance of the Sacrament; yet if Christ did specially command the same, we are bound to that ob­seruance, and should by Communion vnder one kind, sinne not against his Sacrament and Institution, but against a speciall Diuine Precept. E

ANSWER.

WHen Christ instituted the Sacrament, he prouided and prescribed two materiall Elements, and not one one­ly, or none; and he sanctified and distributed both, [Page 482] and with his Institution and Practise, he conioyned a Precept; A Doe this in remembrance of me: Drinke ye all of this. Saint Paul likewise saith, Let a man prooue himselfe, and so let him eate of this Bread, and drinke of this Cup: and the practise of the holy Apo­stles in their dayes, and of the successours of the Apostles; and Saint Pauls owne practise appeareth, 1. Cor. 10.16. & cap. 11.26. and he describeth Communicating, by taking the Cup, as a most noble part, saying, Yee cannot drinke the cup of the Lord and the cup of deuils, 1. Cor. 10.21. Iustin Martir, who borders Iustin. Apol. 2. pa. 76. & 77. vpon the Apostles, saith, That Christians in his age, distributed the sanctified Bread and Wine, [...], to euery one present: and B he addeth further, that the Apostles taught, That Iesus comman­ded [...]. them to doe thus. Saint Chrysostome saith Chrys. sup. 1. Cor. 11. & sup. 2. Cor. Hom. 18., That whereas in the old Law there was a difference betweene Priests and Laicks in commu­nicating of Victimes; in the New Testament it is otherwise, for one Bodie and one Cup is ministred to all. This practise continued as a Law, more than a thousand yeeres after Christ. And Hai­mo Haimo. sup. 1. Cor. 10. pa. 109. (who liued in the yeere 850.) saith, That in his dayes, all the people receiued out of the Cup, the Blood of Christ. And Paschasius Paschas. Rat­bert. d. corp. & sang. Dom. ca. 19. Nec caro sine sanguine vtique, nec sanguis sine carne iure communicatur, &c. Non recte caro sine sanguine communicatur, &c. Ibid. cap. 15. Quapropter [...] homo quotiescunque bibis hunc calicem, &c. after him, saith, That the Flesh, or Bread, is not law­fully receiued, without the Cup or Blood. C

But whatsoeuer our Sauiour himselfe, and his Apostles, and their successours, and the antient Church, by perpetuall succes­sion, taught and practised a thousand yeeres and vpward, yea, euen the Latine Church it selfe, and the Easterne Churches Ochagauia. d. Sacram. tr. 2. d. Euch. q. 18. Graeci suis Laicis distri­buunt vtranque speciem panis & vini. to this day; the Romish generation exalting it selfe aboue God, not onely presumeth to commit Sacriledge at home, but it cen­sureth D the followers of Christs Testament of damnable He­resie Gerson. d. com. sub vtraque. pag. 526. Sumptio talis est temeraria, presumptuosa, scandalosa, seditiosa, & Ecclesiastici ri­tus turbatiua, & ex consequenti aeternae damnationis inductiua, pag. 529. Aduersus haeresin nouam de necessaria communicatione Laicorum, sub vtraque specie, pag. 528. Rex Rom. acciperet potestatem, à sacro Concilio (Constantiensi) factum illud [...], sicut alias haereses in Bohemia, cum po­tentia brachij secularis..

Now, that they may with some colour aduance their owne Tradition against the Ordinance of Christ, they prie into euery corner, and inuent friuolous Glosses and Pretexts, as E wee shall further perceiue, by that which followeth in our Ad­uersaries Discourse.

IESVIT. A

Hence wee may probably inferre, That Christ gaue no speciall Precept thereof, because Christ hath commanded no more concerning the vse of the Eucharist, than what by the substance of the Institution and nature of the Sacra­ment we are bound vnto; leauing accidentall circumstan­ces belonging thereunto, to be ordained by the Apostles and Pastours of the Church, as S. Augustine noteth, saying, August. Ep. 118. Our Lord did not appoint in what order the Sacrament of B the Eucharist was to be taken afterward, but left authori­tie to make such appointments vnto his Apostles, by whom he was to dispose, and order his Church: So clearely doth S. Augustine speake, that Christ gaue no commandement to his Church concerning the vse of the Sacrament, besides such as are contained in the substance of the Institution of the Sacrament, of which kinde, Communion vnder both C kinds, cannot be, as hath beene prooued, which will farther appeare, by pondering the places alleadged to prooue a Precept.

ANSVVER.

Ecclesiasticall power, to adde, detract, or alter any thing a­bout Sacraments, is confined to things adiaphorous: and Saint Augustine Aug. Ep. 118. ca. 2. Totum hoc genus rerum, libe­ras habet obserua­tionis, &c., in the place obiected, speaketh expresly of these: but the materiall parts of Sacraments, belong to their sub­stance, D euen as the matter of the heauens is of the substance of the heauens, and the matter of the Scripture is of the substance of the Scripture.

And if in the holy Eucharist the Element of Wine is not of the substance thereof, then the Eucharist may bee administred without wine; also the kinde of the Element may be changed, and milke or broath, substituted in the place of wine; and the Communion may be celebrated in wine without bread. In all compounded things, the moitie of the matter, is the moitie of the substance: and whatsoeuer Iesuited Romists teach, I see E not how their Laickes can truely say, that they haue at any time in all their liues beene partakers of this Sacrament; for if halfe a man be not a man, then likewise halfe a Communion is not a Communion.

[Page 484] If they except, That they receiue the Blood of Christ A Consecutiue, or by Concomitancie: I reply, This Answere sol­ueth not the difficultie, for I dispute of the materiall Element, and the direct receiuing thereof, and not of receiuing the blood of Christ spiritually, or any other way. Now the wine is a moitie of the substantiall outward matter of the Eucharist, and therefore if they receiue not the wine, they receiue not the one halfe of the substantiall outward matter of the Eucharist; and consequently, they receiue no Eucharist: for as the poope of a ship, the prowe being broken away, is no ship; and as halfe a cloake is not a garment to keepe a man warme: so likewise, B halfe a Communion is no Sacrament.

And concerning the being of Christs Blood in the bread by Concomitancie: I answere, If this were granted, they receiue not Christs blood Sacramentally, but some other way: for no­thing is receiued Sacramentally, but that which is caused by the words of consecration: Ergo, It is not there Sacramentally, and consequently it is not receiued Sacramentally.

IESVIT.

The words of Christ, Doe this in remembrance of C me, doe no wayes inferre a Precept of both kinds. First, 1. Cor. 11. because he said, Doe this in remembrance of me, onely of the Sacrament in forme of bread; of the forme of wine, not absolutely, but conditionally, Doe this as often as you drinke, in memorie of me, that the Aduersaries of the Church, might not haue any the least plausible shew, to complaine of her neglecting Gods Precept. For this Pre­cept, Doe this, being the onely Precept giuen by Christ to D his Church, as shall afterwards appeare, and giuen abso­lutely of the forme of Bread; conditionally of the forme of Wine; there is no colour to accuse the Church of doing against Christs Precept, by Communion vnder one kinde.

ANSWER.

The first reason vpon which you presume, that our Sauiours words, Doe this in remembrance of me, are not Preceptiue, in re­gard E of Communion in both kinds, is an emptie shadow, with­out substance of matter. Our Sauiour in your Tenet, saith not, Doe this as often as you Lay men communicate, but whensoe­uer you receiue the cup and drinke, then doe it in remembrance [Page 485] of me. But if this be the whole sence, then Christs words must A be resolued against sence in this manner.

As often as you Lay people drinke, which needeth neuer to be done by you, (according to Romish Diuinitie) Doe this nothing, in remembrance of me. Secondly, Quotiescunque bi­beritis, as often as you drinke, maketh not the Precept conditio­nall, in respect of the cup, more than of the bread: for in the very next verse it followeth, Quotiescunque ederitis panem hunc, as often as you shall eate this bread: and therefore, if as often as you shall drinke, restraineth the speech in regard of the cup, then as often as you shall eate, restraineth the Precept in regard B of the bread. And Haimo saith, Idem sensus est, &c. There is the same sence of, Doe this, being referred to the cup, as of Doe this, being referred to the bread. But Doe this, referred to the bread, is a Precept: Ergo, Doe this, referred to the cup, is also a Pre­cept. But the Romanist, infatuated with this conceit, croweth as followeth, That the Aduersaries of the Church might not haue the least plausible shew, &c. The Vermine is deceiued, in calling vs, Aduersaries of the Church; for wee are fast friends to the true Catholicke Church, and we are Aduersaries to Romists, an vnsound Church, no otherwise than Saint Paul was to the C Galathians, when he said, Am I therefore become your enemie, be­cause I tell you the truth, Gallat. 4. 16. And touching the fancie of this Obiectour, I adde, That euen as when Saint Paul said, 1. Cor. 10. 31. Whether yee eate or drinke, or whatsoeuer thing else ye doc, doe all to the glorie of God: If these words should be resolued in this manner, As often as ye eate and drinke, doe this to the glorie of God; the placing of this word, As often, restraineth not the speech from being a Precept: so likewise, when Saint Paul saith, As often as ye shall drinke, doe this in remembrance of me; this manner of speaking, altereth not his words from being a D commandement.

IESVIT.

Secondly, suppose Christ spake these imperatiue words, Doe this, after the giuing of the Cup, yet are they to be vn­derstood with this restriction, Doe this, that is, all things that belong to the essence and substance of this Action, in E memorie of me: for if we extend the Precept, Doe this, further than the substance of the Action, vnto the Acci­dentarie circumstances thereof, in which, Christ did then institute and gaue the Sacrament, many absurdities will [Page 486] follow. By this rule, wee must alwayes celebrate and re­ceiue A the Eucharist after supper, as Christ did; especially, seeing this circumstance of after supper, was chosen of Christ, as being verie proper and mysterious: for there­by is signified, that this is the sacrifice which succeedes the Paschall Lambe that was offered in the euening: the sacri­fice, whereof the royall Prophet saieth in the person of Christ, Eleuatio manuum mearum Sacrificium ves­pertinum, The Sacrifice instituted in the Euening of the B World, to continue vntill the end thereof. We should also by this rule, be bound stil to celebrate in Azime, that is, vn­leauened Bread, in which Christ did celebrate and giue the Sacrament, saying, Do this: which circumstance was al­so mysticall, signifying the puritie of our Sauiours virgi­nall bodie and person, which was without any leauen of finne. And befides, the Priest might not giue the Sacrament vnto any but such whose feet he had washedafore, seeing C Christ gaue the Eucharist with this preparatiue Circum­stance: which doubtlesse is verie pertinent, and myste­rious, to signifie with what puritie of conscience men ought to approach vnto the sacred Table. If to bind men to obserue these circumstances of our Sauiours Action (though mysterious and Sacramentall) were absurd (as without doubt it is most absurd) then we must not extend the Precept, Doe this, to the Circumstances of Christs Action; but acknowledge that the Precept, Do this, onely D includes the doing of that which pertaines to the substance of the Sacrament, and so not to the giuing of both kinds, the substance thereof being entire in one onely kind, as hath beene prooued.

ANSVVER.

This precept is not extended to things adiaphorous, and ac­cidentall circumstances, such as was the time, after supper; the E place, and vpper roome; the persons, men onely, and no wo­men; the qualitie of the bread, vnleauened; the gesture of the receiuers, the preuious washing of feet, &c. but it commandeth onely that which was of the substance of the holy Eucharist. [Page 487] And the sacramentall signes of Bread and Wine, or such as A hath formerly beene prooued, pag. 482. &c.

IESVIT.

The second Text, much vrged for the giuing of the Cup vnto all men, is the words of our Sauiour, Bibite ex hoc omnes, wherein some note our Sauiours prouidence, saying, That he foreseeing that some would take the Cup from the Laitie, granting them the consecrated Bread, said B of the Supper, Bibite ex hoc omnes; but not of the Bread, Manducate ex hoc omnes. I answere, The words of our Sauiour be plaine, Drinke ye all of this; but the diffi­cultie is, to whom they are spoken, and who are these all? Luther would haue, all men for whom the bloud of Christ was shed; whence is followes, that as the Bloud of Christ was shed for all men, euen Infidels, Iewes, Turkes, In­fants, the Cup also should be giuen vnto all these, which to C say were verie absurd. Others restraine the word, All, to the Faithfull, come to the yeares of discretion, who must drinke of the Cup all of them. But what shall we say of them that are by nature abstemij, who cannot indure the tast of any wine, yet are not to be excluded from the Sa­crament?

Wherefore the trueth is, that these wordes were spo­ken vnto all the Apostles, and to them All only. And though D it be enough for Catholickes to say it, and put their Ad­uersaries to prooue their pretended precept, which they call of the eternall King, for the Cup (and so long as they cannot cleerely conuince the contrarie, good reason the word of the Church, defined by Councels, should stand) yet exabū ­danti, we can very probably shew out of the sacred Text, that the particle All, concernes all the Apostles only. First, Math. 26. what one Euangelist saith was commanded vnto all, Bibi­te ex hoc omnes, Drinke yee all of this; another relates to E haue beene answerably performed by them all, biberunt [...]. ex eo omnes, all dranke thereof. But the second All, is re­strained to all the Apostles, and to them all onely: What [Page 488] reason then is there to extend the words, Drinke yee all of A this, further than to all the Apostles?

ANSVVER.

That which S. Stephen spake to the vnfaithfull Iewes, Yee do alwaies resist the holy Ghost, Act. 7. 51. is verified in the Pharisees of Rome, for no light of heauenly veritie is so il­lustrious, which this generation, in fauour of their owne im­pietie, will not indeauour to cloud.

Is it possible for any thing to be more euident for Commu­nion B in both kindes, than this precept of Christ, Drinke yee all of this Gerard. Lo­rich. in 7. par. Can. Sunt Pseudoca­tholici qui refor­mationem Eccle­siae quoquo modo remorari non ve­rentur. Hij ne Lai­cis altera species restituatur, nullis parcunt blasphe­mijs. Dicunt enìm Christum solis A­postolis dixisse bi­bite exhoc omnes. A [...] verba Ca­nonis habent, ac­cipite & mandu­cate ex hoc omnes. Hic dicant oro, nū & hoc ad solos dictum sit Apo­stolos. Ergò Laicis & a specie panis est abstinendum; quod dicere est haeresis & blas­phemia pestilens & execrabilis. Cō ­sequitur ergò, v­trumquè verbum dictum esse ad omnem Ecclesiam.? especially when the same is expounded by the im­mediat practise of our Sauiour, and by the practise of the ho­ly Apostles, and of the Primitiue Church? But the sonnes of darkenesse, hauing renounced veritie, and chosen the way of errour, blunder and grope in the cleere light, and verba recta ac veritatis luce fulgentia, tortuosis interpretationibus obscurare & de­prauare moliuntur (as S. Augustine Aug. tom. 7. d. nupt. & concupis. lib. 2. cap. 2. long since spake of the Pe­lagians.) The Iesuits euasion or starting hole is, the words of Christ, Math. 26.27. Drinke yee all of this, containe a precept C not generall to all Communicants, but speciall or singular, to the Apostles onely. The reasons of this assertion are: First, if the precept were generall, then all men for whom the Bloud of Christ was shed, euen Infidels, Iewes, Turkes, and Infants must receiue the Cup. A profound obiection, and such as will take away the Bread as well as the Cup from Lay people. For at the instant, when Christ ordained and administred the holy Eucharist, none were present (for ought we know) but only the Apostles. And there is extant a speciall rule touching people of riper yeares, and for Christians onely to receiue this Sacra­ment, D 1. Cor. 11.28. &c. cap. 10.17.21. and Cardinall Caietan Caietan. in Math. 26. Hinc habetur Eucharistiam non esse tribuendam insfantibus, quibus non [...] dici accipite comedite, sicut enim quià Dominus dixit nisi quis natus fuerit denuò ex a qua & spiritu, nega­tur Baptismus infantibus in materno vtero, quià non potest denuo nasci qui non est natus, ità dicente Do­mino in Communione Eucharistiae, accipite commedite, negatur Eucharistia illis, qui adhuc non possunt accipere, qui adhuc non possunt commedere. concludeth the same out of our Sauiors precept, Math. 26.26.

The consequence of this Obiection, to wit, the Precept of E Christ, is not generall in respect of all Christians rightly dispo­sed; because when the Eucharist was first administred, and these words vttered, none were present but the Apostles, is like vn­to these which follow. None were present but the Apostles, and the words were in speciall directed to them, when Christ [Page 489] said, Watch and pray least yee fall into temptation, Math. 26.41. Er­go, A this precept concerneth the Apostles onely, and not Lay men. Also when our Sauiour said, Math. 18.3. Vnlesse yee bee conuerted, and become as little children, yee shall not enter into the kingdome of God, the Apostles onely were present, and the Doctrine was personally pronounced to them alone. Also, Math. 18.9. 15.22. the like is found concerning other do­ctrines and precepts, and yet these doctrines and precepts are common to all Christians. The Romists (if they were not partiall) could distinguish betweene personall precepts deliue­red to the Apostles onely (as they were by office Pastors of B the Church) and betweene common precepts, deliuered vnto them as Christians, and as they represented the whole body of the Church.

But the Obiectour addeth, That we are not able to demon­strate, that this Precept Drinke yee all of this, was common. I answere, First, if that which Christ said to the Apostles, S. Paul spake to the whole multitude of Beleeuers, then Christs words vttered to the Apostles were common: But the first is true, 1. Cor. 11. 28. And S. Hierome Hierom. com. sup. 1. Corin. 11. Chrys. in 1. Cor. 11. Hom. 24. Quod dominicū est pri­uatum fecerant, Coena enim Do­mini debet esse communis, nam quae Domini sunt, non huius sunt serui, non alterius, sed omnibus communia. Quod enim dominicum est idem & commune est. Nam si Domini est, non debes tanquam proprium tibi assumere, sed tanquam res Domini communiter omnibus proponere Siquidem hoc est Dominicum. Nunc autèm non sinis esse com­mune sed tibi comedis. Durand Rational. Diu lib. 4 cap. 1. In Primitiua Ecclesia singulis diebus omnes qui celebrationi missarum intererant communicare solebant, eo quod Apostoli omnes, de Calice biberunt, Domino dicente bibite ex co omnes. inferreth vpon the same, Oportet Coenam dominicam esse communem, quià ille omnibus Discipulis suis C qui aderant, equalitèr tradidit Sacramenta, The Lords Supper ought to be common, because Christ deliuered the Sacraments of his Bodie and Bloud equally to all the Disciples that were present.

Secondly, If Communion in both kinds hath not founda­tion D in Christs words vttered to the Apostles, then Commu­nion in one kind wanteth foundation in Christs words and in­stitution: and if it haue not foundation in Christs words, then it wanteth all foundation; for S. Paul grounds his whole Do­ctrine, touching the holy Eucharist, vpon our Sauiours words and institution, 1. Cor. 11.23.

Thirdly, If the reason why the Apostles receiued the Cup, was, because they were Priests, then all Priests being present at the communion, ought to receiue in both kinds, although they E administer not; but this is repugnant to the practise of the Romane Church.

Fourthly, It is not certaine that the Apostles were Priests when Christ ordained and administred the Eucharist, for that [Page 490] they were not Priests, Math. 18. is affirmed by our Aduersa­ries A Henriq. sum. [...]. 5. c. 1. nu. 2., and that they were made Priests, Luke 22. by the words Hoc facite, as Bellarmine, Suares, Henriques, Hosius, Canisius, &c. say, can neuer be prooued: for what force is there in Hoc fa­cite, to conclude Priestly Ordination: and if Hoc facite proo­ueth Priesthood, then Lay men are made Priests, when the words, Doe this in remembrance of mee, are spoken to them Aquin. 3. q. 80. ar. 11. Homo te­netur hoc Sacra­mentum sumere, non solum ex sta­tuto Ecclesiae, sed ex mandato Do­mini, dicentis, Luc. 22. Hoc facite., in part, or respectiuely. Hitherto we haue found nothing in our Aduersaries, but Sophistrie of words, and Theomachie against Diuine Institution and Apostolicall Tradition. But to hold correspondence with the rest, the Iesuit addeth: B

IESVIT.

Secondly, These words, Accipite, manducate, bibite, Take, eate, drinke, were certainely spoken vnto the same persons, and they runne so together in rancke, that no man can with probabilitie make the one outrunne the other: But the command, Accipite, which signifies, Take with your hands, (for it is a Precept distinct from Man­ducate, which is, take with your mouth) was giuen to the C Apostles onely, not vnto all the faithfull; else wee must say, That all Communicants were bound to take the conse­crated Bread and Cup with their hands: who euer heard of such a Precept in the Christian Church.

ANSWER.

This Argument truely propounded, is, D

All persons commanded to eate, were commanded to take.

None but the Apostles were commanded to take: for if Lay men were commanded to take, they must alwayes receiue the Eu­charist in their hands, Ergo,

None but the Apostles were commanded to eate.

This Obiection, fighteth against Lay mens receiuing in one kinde, which vntill [...] we supposed Papists had permitted, but it seemeth that they will haue the whole vse of the Sacra­ment depend vpon the Popes deuotion and pleasure. E

But touching the Argument, I denie the Assumption: for Lay men were commanded to take, that is, to receiue, at least into their mouthes, and then to manducate, that is, to chew or swallow, and to let the Element receiued, passe into their [Page 491] stomack Bellarm. d. Eu­char. li. 1. ca. 11. [...] ab [...] stomachum, per instrumenta humana & natu­ralia, id est lin­guam & palatum.. To take with the hand is agreeable to Christs man­ner A of Administration Caietan in Mat. 26. [...] e­go, quod sicut v­num Calicem cō ­munem omnibus tradidit, ita in vna [...] panem in duodecim [...] fractum, mani­bus [...] tradi­derit [...]. [...]. li. 9. ca. 30. Quomo­do manus extendes de quibus adhuc sanguis stillat iniustus? Quomodo huiusmodi manibus accipres sanctum Domini corpus? Qua temeritate ore tuo [...] sanguinis pretiofi percipies, &c. Euseb. Eccles. Hist. [...]. 7. ca. 9. cum & gratiarum actionem in Ecclesia audisset, & ad illam vna cum alijs Amen accinuisset, [...], manum ad suscipiendum Sanctum cibum extendisset. Chrys. in Eph. Hom. 3. Quomodo comparebis ante Tri­bunal Christi, qui manibus & labijs immundis, ipsius audes contingere corpus, &c. Niceph. li. 13. [...]. 7. [...]. li. 8. ca. 5. Aug. Cont Petil. li. 2. ca. 23. [...] illum commemoro, &c. Cui pacis osculum inter Sacramenta [...], in cuius manibus [...]. Rhenanus Annot. in [...]. d. Cor. [...]. Satis liquet ex Anti­quorum lectione, Eucharistiam olim manibus [...] attactum fuisse. Synod. 6. can. [...]. Et [...]. ibid. C pa. 491. Cyprian. d. Laps. n 64. Plus modo in Dominum manibus atque ore delinquunt, &c. Ib. n. [...]. Et quod non statim Domini corpus [...] accipiat, aut ore polluto [...]. &c., and it was vsed in the Primitiue Church, but the same is not of absolute necessitie, for some Communicants may want hands, or the naturall vse thereof: but to receiue into the mouth, and then to manducate or drinke, is commanded. The Iesuit imagineth, that all taking, is by the hand, and thus he prooueth himselfe to be neither good Gram­marian, nor Diuine. Virgill saith, Illos porticibus rex accipiebat in amplis: where, accipio is to entertaine. S. Paul saith, Per quem ac­cepimus gratiam, Rom. 1. 5. By whom we haue receiued grace and Apostleship, ca. 8.15. Ye haue receiued ( [...]) the spi­rit B of Adoption. The Angell said, Ioseph thou sonne of Dauid, feare not to take Mary thy wife. Math. 1. 20. His Bishopricke, let ano­ther man take. Act. 1.20.

IESVIT.

The third reason is, because there was a peculiar and personall cause, Why Christ should giue that particular Councellor Admonition (for the imperatiue word doth not euer signifie a precept, but often an aduise, or a permission, as your Maiestie well knowes) to his Apostles, at that time, to wit, because he would haue them all, not onely drinke of D his bloud, but also would haue them drinke of the same Cup, without filling and consecrating the same anew, this is more manifest in the Protestants opinion, who thinke the Chalice whereof Christ said in S. Mathew, Bibite ex hoc omnes, Math. 26.27. to be the same whereof he said in S. Luke, Accipite, diui­dite Luk. 22. v. 18. inter vos, non enim bibam amplius de hoc geni­mine vitis: For this being supposed, the words Drinke ye all of this, imports the same, as Diuide this Cup amongst you. E But, Diuide this Cup amongst you, was a personall precept, giuen to all the Apostles; importing that euery one should drinke but a part of that Cup, and that also in such mea­sure [Page 492] as the Cup, without new filling and consecration, might A suffice for all to drinke therof, What? All men in the world? Or all Christians that should succeede them to the Worlds end? Christ neuer intended that one Cup for all, nor is it indeed diuided or parted with vs, but the Apostles dranke it vp amongst them. Wherefore referring my saying to your Maiesties learned censure, I conclude, that to me it seemes cleere, that the precept or rather direction, Drinke ye all of this, was but personall, confined vnto the number of B all there then present.

ANSWER.

The Precept, Drinke ye all of this (saith the Iesuit) was per­sonall, and concerned the Apostles onely, because our Sauiour commanded them All to drinke of the same Cup without fil­ling and consecrating it anew. But, if Drinke ye all of this, had imported a generall duty, then Christ could not haue stinted them to one single Cup.

This obiection is grounded vpon a false Principle, which is, C all Precepts are Personall in regard of their substance, wherein any circumstance is Personall. Nothing can be more absurd and false than this Position: for in the Decalogue it selfe, some things were Personall, as appeareth by the Preface, Exod. 20.2. Likewise in many generall or common Preepts of the old and new Testament, some personall circumstances may be noted, and yet the substance of the Commandement is generall. 1. Cro. 28.9. Pro. 30.1.3. Math. 18.2.3. Ioh. 13.13, 14.

Also we may consider a twofold vnitie of the Cup: Specifical, D and Indiuiduall; to drinke of the same indiuiduall Cup, euen as to eate of the same indiuiduall loase, is an accidentall circum­stance. But to drinke, and receiue the common kind, to wit, the fruit of the Wine, this is the substance of the Commandement. If we parallell the Obiection, the defect is manifestly ridicu­lous. It is not of the substance of Christs Commandement, That lay People shall receiue consecrated Bread at the Communion, because the Bread which Christ gaue his Disciples, was of one Indiuiduall loafe, but the bread of one indiuiduall loafe will not suffice all men in the world, therefore the Precept of receiuing E consecrated Bread was Personall, and concerned the Apostles only. Now if a man should vse this Argument, which in sub­stance is the same with the Iesuits, he had in my opinion, more cause to blush for shame, than to glory before the Presence of a most iudicious and learned King, as this vaine Boaster doth.

IESVIT. A

Another text of Scripture some vrge to prooue, That Communion vnder one kind is commanded, to wit, the fa­mous place out of the sixt chapter of S. Iohn, Except ye Ioh. 6.54. eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of the Sonne of man, you shall not haue life in you. Where our Saui­our vnder the penaltie of loosing eternall life, commands B not onely eating but also drinking, Perchance your Maie­stie doth not stand much vpon this, as not beleeuing that chapter of S. Iohn to concerne the Sacramentall sumpti­on of our Sauiours Flesh, as also some learned Catholikes hold. Not withstanding, though we grant that Chapter to concerne the eating and drinking in the Sacrament, as most of the Fathers teach, yet this obiection may be easily satis­fied by the former Principles: for as we distinguish in the C Sacrament the substance and the manner, The substance being to receiue the body of Christ, the manner in both kinds by formall eating and drinking: so the same distin­ction is to be made in our Sauiours Precept about this Sa­crament. For howsoeuer his words may sound of the man­ner of receiuing in both kinds, yet his intention is to com­mand no more than the substance, to wit, that we really receiue his body and bloud, which may be done vnder one kind. This is made cleere by the Precept by our Sauiour gi­uen D about another Sacrament, to wit, Baptisme; where, though his words seeme to define the manner, yet his mind was but to determine the substance: He saith to his Apo­stles, Baptise all nations in the name of the Father, Math. 28.23. and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost: To baptise, signifies the same that the Greeke word [...], that is, not to wet or sprinkle with water, but to put and plunge into the Water by immersion, bathing them in water; in E which respect, Baptisme is tearmed by the Apostle, the La­uer or Bath of the renouation of the holy Ghost. And yet Ad Tit. 3. c. 54. because the Church teacheth Baptisme by [...] or [Page 494] sprinkling to be sufficient and substantiall Baptisme, no A lesse than Baptisme by immersion, Christians must and doe so interpret the words of Christ (Baptize) that is, plunge into the water all Nations, to command onely cleansing and washing in substance, not the manner thereof by im­mersion, as his words may seeme to import, and the Primi­tiue Church did the first sixe hundred yeares practise. Jn this like sort, the words, Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke of his bloud, you B shall not haue life in you, be preceptiue no further than they signifie reall receiuing of his body and bloud; not the manner of both kinds, as may appeare by the intention of the Commaundement. For as Christ gaue this Precept of Eating and Drinking, onely to the end that wee might haue life in vs; so likewise he meant to command the same no further than it was ne­cessary to this end. But eating formally the body of Christ C vnder the forme of Bread, and vertually and implicit­ly his bloud, as contayned within his Sacred body, suf­fiseth that we may haue life in vs, as he promiseth in the same place, He that eateth this Bread shall liue for Ibidem v. 59. euer: What necessitie then is there to vnderstand this Precept of formall receiuing in both kinds?

But further I adde the coniunctiue particle (&, and) signifies disjunctiuely the same that (vel, or) as Argentum Act. 3. 6. D & aurum non est mihi, and particularly of this Sacra­ment, He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily, eateth 1. Cor. 11.29. and drinketh damnation: the sence is disjunctiue, eateth or drinketh vnworthily. In this sort the words of Christ, Except you eate and drinke, is to be vnderstood disjun­ctiuely, Except you eate the flesh or drinke the bloud Ioan. 3.5. of the Sonne of man, you shall not haue life in you. Which disjunctiue sence to be the sence intended in this place, may be prooued, because else Christ should be contra­ry E to himselfe: for seeing in the ver. 59. of this Chapter, He promiseth life eternall to eating onely, Qui manducat panem viuit in aeternum, If in the foure and fiftie [Page 495] verse of the same Chapter, he require vnto himselfe life e­uerlasting, A eating and drinking both, he should in the space of a few lines speake contraries. And because this is impossible, wee interprete the place disiunctiuely, vnlesse you eate or drinke, &c.

ANSWER.

Cardinall Bellarmine Bellarm. d. Eu­char. l. 1. c. 5. [...] tholici fere [...] volunt, huius capitis ver­ba de Sacramento ipso Eucharistiae, siue de Sacramen­tali manducatione corporis Domini in Eucharistia. affirmeth, that the Text of Saint Iohn cap. 6. is to be expounded of the holy Eucharist; and not one­ly B of spirituall receiuing, but also of Sacramentall eating and drinking the Bodie and Blood of Christ: And hee saith, that although some Catholickes, to wit, Gabriel Biel Biel. Can. Miss. lect. 48., Cusanus Cusau. Epist. 7. ad Bohem., Caietan Caietan. in 3. q. 80. ar. vlt. & sup. Ioh. 6., Ruard Tapper Ruard. Art. 15., Hesselius Hessel. lib. d. Com. sub vna specie., and [...] Iansen. Concord. cap. 59., expound this Chapter of spirituall Receiuing, yet other Pontificians hold, as himselfe doth Bellarm. ib. Caeteri Scrip­tores C Ecclesiastici, quos in maximo numero citat Nicholaus Sanderus in lib. d. 6. cap. Ioh. summo consensu docent, in hoc capite agi de manducatione Sacramentali, quod sine dubio verissimumest.: with Bellarmine also agree Suares Suares. in 3. to. 3. Disp. 46. Sect. 2., Vasques Vasq. in 3. Disp. 179. cap. 5., Gregorie Valence Greg. Val. to. 4. Disp. 6. q. 1. punct. 5., Salmeron, Barradius, &c.

From this Exposition, it followeth, That Communicants when they partake the holy Eucharist, ought to receiue in both kindes; for our Sauiour saith, Iohn 6.54. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, &c. 55. My flesh is meate indeed, and my blood is drinke indeed, 56. Hee that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 53. Except ye eate the flesh, and drinke the blood of the Sonne of man, &c.

Our Aduersarie, after some staggering about the place, Ioh. 6. condescendeth at last to Bellarmines Tenet, and admitting that D Saint Iohn treateth of Sacramentall Receiuing, answeres the former places, by a distinction of substance and manner, saying, That howsoeuer Christs words may sound of the manner of Receiuing in both kinds; yet his intention is, to command no more than the substance; and he prooueth this by the example of Baptisme, wherein, although according to the letter, dip­ping and plunging into the water is required, yet according to the Intention, sprinckling is sufficient.

But heere I demand of the Romist, Whether any thing tou­ching E the manner of receiuing the Eucharist, is deliuered in Christs words or not? And if nothing, then our Sauiour trea­teth not, either of Spirituall or Sacramentall eating or drin­king, for both these belong to the manner: and if hee speake [Page 496] about the manner, then the Blood of Christ must be Sacramen­tally A receiued, as well as his Bodie: but it is not receiued Sa­cramentally Innocent. Papa. d. Offic. Miss. l. 4. c. 21. Nec sanguis sub specie panis, nec corpus sub spe­cie vini bibitur, & comeditur, quia sicut nec sanguis comeditur, nec corpus bibitur, ita [...] specie panis bibitur, aut sub species vini comeditur. Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. m. 4. ar. 1. §. 1. Christus quantum ad corpus non signatur [...] in specie vini [...] quantum [...] sanguinem [...], in specie panis, praeterea in hoc Sacramento signatur Christus, [...] cibus B perfecte manducantes reficiens Sacramentaliter & spiritualiter: perfecta autem refectio, non est in pane tantum, necin vino tantum, sed in vtroque. vnder bread alone, because to receiue Sacramen­tally, is to receiue vnder the proper and indiuiduall signe, repre­senting the Blood receiued, which is Wine. And implicite and vertuall receiuing of Christs Blood, is spirituall drinking, and this is performed out of the Sacrament, and not onely in the same.

The last euasion is, That in the words of Christ, Et, is taken for Aut, that is, vnlesse you eate the flesh, or drinke the blood of the Sonne of man, ye haue no life, &c. This poore Cauill, borrowed from Claudius de Saincts Claud. Saint. d. Euchar. Repet. 10. cap. 1., is against the letter of the Text: and if it be admitted, then it will follow, That it is not necessarie to drinke the blood of the Sonne of man, implicite­ly and vertually: and the reason why Christ nameth bread alone, vers. 51. is, in opposition to Manna: for the Sonne of C God descended from heauen by incarnation, and propounded himselfe incarnate, as an obiect of Faith Innocent. Papa. d. Offic. Miss. li. 4. ca. 21. Est modus sumendi corpus & sanguinem, quo neutrum mandu­catur & bibitur., and because he was the spirituall Life, and food of mans soule, by donation of his Word and Grace; and heerein excelled Manna, which was one­ly corporall bread. But in the sacred Eucharist Christ is repre­sented, as hauing perfected mans saluation, and this represen­tation is made by two sensible signes, wherein his suffering of death, by separation of bodie and soule, and of bodie and blood, is visibly proposed: and whosoeuer receiueth him Sacramen­tally, as he was sacrificed on the Crosse, must receiue him by D both the signes; because in both, and not in one alone, there is a representation of his Passion, and of the effusion of his blood.

As for the Iesuites instance in the manner of Baptising, whe­ther by plunging or by sprinckling, the same is not to purpose: For in our Question, the Dispute is, about taking away one of the Elements and materiall parts of a Sacrament: in Baptisme onely a circumstance, in the manner of applying and vsing the Element, was altered by the Church. But from alteration of a thing accidentall, or of circumstance, to inferre a libertie to E defalcate a substantiall part, is sophisticall.

IESVIT. §. 5. A Communion vnder one kinde, not against the Practise of the Primitiue CHVRCH.

CErtaine it is, that the Primitiue Church did very of­ten and frequently vse Communion vnder both kindes, so that Lay men had by prescription a right Ad bibendum po­culū Domini iu­re communicatio­nis admittimus Cypr. l. Ep. 2. to receiue in both kindes, yea, they were bound thereunto B by the Obligation of custome, not by Diuine Precept.

ANSWER.

f Cyprian. Ep. 54. Quomodo docemus aut prouocamus eos, in confessione nominis E Christi, sanguinē suum fundere, si eis militaturis Christi sanguinem denegamus, aut quomodo ad Martyrij poculum idoneos facimus, si non eos prius ad bibendum in Ecclesia poculum Domini iure communicationis [...]. Id. Epist. 63. Quomodo possumus propter Christum sanguinem sundere, qui sanguinem Chri­sti [...] scimus bibere. THe Primitiue Church, in all her publicke Assemblies and congregations, administred the holy Eucharist to the people in both kinds perpetually, and not frequently one­ly, or often (as the Iesait minseth.) And Iustin Martir saith Reade before, pag. 482., That the Apostles prescribed this, as commanded by Christ: C and Saint Cyprian Cyprian. serm. d. Caena. Dom. & Epist. 63. A Do­mino praecipitur, & ab Apostolis eius idem confir­matur, & ab E­uangelicis prae­ceptis omnino re­cedendū non esse, & eadem quae ma­gister docuit & fecit, Discipulos quoque obseruare & facere debere, cum in claritate sua, & Maiestate coelesti, venire cae­perit, inueniat nos, tenere quod mo­nuit, obseruare quod docuit, fa­cere quod fecit. hath these words, Lex esum sanguinis prohi­bet, Euangelium precipit vt bibatur; Whereas the old Law for­bade the eating of blood, the Gospell commandeth to drinke the blood: and in his 63 Epistle, Many Bishops, &c. depart not from that which our Master Christ commanded and per­formed ( Praecepit & iussit) but others of ignorance and sim­plicitie, In Calice Dominico sanctificando, & [...] ministrando, In consecrating and ministring the Cup to the people, doe not that which Christ our Lord and God performed and taught. Petrus de Occhagauia saith Occhagauia. d. Sacram. d. Euch. vsu & effect. tr. 2. nu. 14. Cyprianus vt legenti [...] non habet verba illa, & plebi mini­strando., that the words, Et plebi ministrando, D Deliuering it to the people, are not S t. Cyprians. But this man went by heare-say, as appeareth both by the elder & later Edi­tion Cyprian. ll. 2. Ep. 3. In the beginning of the Epistle Printed at [...] [...] 542. of Cyprian: And that this was the constant Doctrine of this Father, is manifest by other places cited in the Margen Pammel. Cypr. Epist. 63.. Therefore it is palpably vntrue which the Iesuit venteth, They were bound thereunto by Obligation of Custome, and not by Diuine Precept.

IESVIT. A

Also because the Manichees, being impiously per suaded [...]. de Heres. 46. that wine was the gall of the prince of darknesse, did su­perstitiously abstaine from the Chalice. The Church in dete­station [...]. Ser. 4. d. Qua­drages. of this errour, commaunded, for a time, Communion vnder both kinds: Vpon which ocasion Gelasius Pope made Gelas. apud Grati­an. d. Consecrat. Cap. [...]. the decree recorded by Gratian, aut integra Sacramenta suscipiant, aut ab integris arceantur. And why, because B such Abstinents, [...] qua superstitione docentur a­stringi, that is were superstitious, not abstaining out of any deuotion, but out of impious persuasion of the impuri­tie of Gods creature. Wherefore the crime with which some Protestants charge vs, That our receiuing vnder the sole forme of Bread, is to iumpe in opinion with the Ma­nichees, we may (as Doctor Morton confesseth) reiect as in­jurious, [...]. [...] appeale, li. 2. ca. 4. 140. saying, That it was not the Manichees [...] C from wine, but the reason of their for [...], that was iudged hereticall. This custome was the cause that Cypri­an [...]. de Coena Domini. saieth, That the Law [...] the eating of bloud, but the [...] commaunds the same should be drunke, not only because some Christians, to wit, Priests are bound to [...] the Bloud of Christ, but also because Christ in his [...] did [...] the Sacrament of his Bodie and Bloud in both kinds. Whence grew the custome of the Primitiue Church, to receiue in both kinds, and by custome there grew further, D an Oligation to drinke of the [...] there were some iust cause of [...], as in the sicke, and in some that by nature loathed wine.

ANSVVER.

One errour begets another. It was formerly said, that Com­munion in both kinds was vsed by the Fathers, as a matter of custome onely, and not because of precept: now it is added, E that this was done only because of the errour of the Manichees. I answere, First, before euer the Manichees appeared in any number Prateol. d. Haer. li. 11. Manichaei à manete quodam, &c. dicti sunt qui circa annum 273, &c., Communion in both kinds was in practise, as ap­peareth by the Apostles, and by Ignatius, Dionysius, Iustin [Page 499] Martyr, Ireneus, Tertullian, [...], and Saint Cy­prian Floruit (Cypri­anus) an. 250. Bell. d. Scriptor.. A

Secondly, although Pope [...] Lev, Serm. 4. d. Quadrag. Cum ad tegendum infi­delitatem suā no­stris audent inter­esse mysterijs, ità in Sacramentorū Communione se temperāt, vt inter­dum tutius lateāt, ore indigno Chri­sti corpus accipi­unt, B sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae, haurire omnino declinant. Quod ideò vestram [...], vt vobis huiusmodi homines, & his manifestentur [...], & quorum [...]. fuerit [...] notati & [...] à Sanctorum societate [...] Sacerdotali authoritate. in his Sermon speaketh of the Manichees, yet Vasques Vasques. in 3. disp. 216. cap. 4. nu. 42. Ego existimo nequè proptèr Manicheorum, Haeresin, commendatum fuisse ab Apostolis, aut à Leone primo vsum Calicis, &c. Leo non commendauit vsum Calicis contrà Manichaeos, fed admonuit vt diligentèr obseruarent quosdam Manichaeos, qui vt se Catholicos simularent, ità sumebant Calicem, vt sanguinem non haurirent in altera specie. the Iesuit saith, That he com­manded not the vse of the Cup; because of them, but requi­red that these Heretickes which feigned themselues Ca­tholickes, and came to the holy Communion, receiuing the Bread, and taking the Cup into their hands, pretending that they drunke the Wine, and yet did not, should carefully be obserued.

Thirdly, touching the place of Pope Gelasius Gratian. d. Consecrat. Dist. 2. cap. Comperimus autem, quod qui­dem sumpta tan­tummodo corpo­ris sacri portione à Calice sacti cruo­ris abstineant. Qui proculdubio (nes­cio qua superstiti­one dicuntur a­stringi) aut inte­gra Sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur, quià diuisio vnius, eiusdemquè mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio, non potest prouenire., the same Au­thor saith Vasques Disp. 216. cap. 6. nu. 76. Quidam probabilitèr explicant de Laicis Manichaeis, qui communi­cabant sub altera specie tantum, &c. Verum haec explicatio, licet reliquis verbis [...] accommodari possit, extremis tamèn quibus causam reddit, non potest conuenire. Ill is enim denotat, tale esse my sterium secun­dum D se, vt sine grandi sacrilegio diuidi nequeat, nempè intelligere [...] ratione suae significationis & institutionis., That whereas some of his part applie the same to the Manichees, yet this exposition agreeth not with the last branch of the Canon; for therein Gelasius teacheth that the C mysterie of the Eucharist is of that nature in regard of it selfe, that without grieuous sacriledge it cannot be diuided and se­uered the one part from the other, to wit, because of the insti­tution and signification. Thus our Aduersarie is confuted, touching Pope Leo and Gelasius, by a most intelligent and lear­ned Doctour of his owne societie.

IESVIT.

And as this is certaine and granted on our part, so it is no lesse certaine that the Primitiue Church did neuer practise the vse of the Cup, as pertaining to the essentiall integritie of the Sacrament, or as commaunded by diuine precept, but thought the recoiuing vnder one and both E kinds, a thing indifferent. This may be prooued by the con­sideration of the time since Christs [...], from our dayes vpward, whence I gather fiue Arguments.

[Page 500] First, is the confession of our Aduersaries, amongst A whom a Bohemian Protestant doth professe, That hauing [...]. [...]. Confess. fid. Cath. ca. 19. Hospin. Hist. sacra. pa. 2. fo. 112. the feare of God before his eyes, be dares not censure the Roman Church of Heresie in this point. Hospinian writes that some Protestants confessed that whole christ was re­ally present, exhibited, and receiued vnder euery kind, and therefore vnder the onely forme of Bread: and that they did not iudge those to do euill that communicated vnder one kind. Melancthon, As to eate, or not to eate Swines flesh, [...]. in 2. Edit. loc. com. Im­press. Argent. ann. 1525. fol. 78. is placed in our power, and athing indifferent, so (saith B he) J iudge of the Eucharist, that they finne not, who know­ing and beleeuing this libertie, doe vse either part of the figne. And Luther, They finne not against Christ, who vse [...]. de Captiu. Babilon. ca. d. Eu­char. one kind, seeing Christ doth not commaund to vse it, but hath left it to the will of euerie one. And Hospinian alledg­eth Hospin. Histor. sacr. 1. 2. fo. 12. Luther, affirming, Jt is not needfull to giue both kinds, but the one alone sufficeth: the Church hath power of or­daining onely one, and the people ought to be content there­with, C if it be ordained by the Church.

But these testimonies though they may serue to stop the mouth of a clamorous Aduersarie, yet are they not suffici­ent to satisfie any iuditious man, in regard their Authors were men most vncertaine and various in their Doctrines about Religion, now auerring as Orthodox and diuine Truth, what soone after they fell to abhor as hereticall and impious. D

ANSWER.

Concerning Luther, Melancthon, Iohannes Perzibram, &c. I an­swere, that your benefactor Coccius (to whom you are perpetu­ally indebted for your readings) alledgeth some such sayings out of these Authors, but how truely it is vncertaine; for in the ordinarie editions, I find the contrarie deliuered by them Luther. Edit. Wittenberg. anno 1546. d. Captiuit. Babil. d. Euchar. pa. 95. col. 2. Sivtra species potest ne­gari Laicis poterit & eis pars Baptis­mi & poenitentiae tolli. Sivini speciem potest Ecclesia tollere Laicis, potest & panis speciem tollere, &c. Melancth. Loc. Edit. 1561. Lipsiae pa. 188. Iuel. Replie. ar. 2. These godly learned men, when they saw that through the malice of their [...], they could not obtaine, that Christs Institution might vniuersally E be receiued, yet they defired at least, it might be left free without restraint, for euery Church to do therein as they should think good, and that without murmure or offecne of others, &c. Not that they thought Christ had not ordained the Sacrament to be administred vnto the people in both kinds, or that in it selfe it is in­different, but as the godly Fathers at the beginning, when they could not persuade the princes of the world, and their people to receiue the [...] yet they thought they were [...] when they might haue place and libertie for themselues, surely and with quiet conscience to meet together, and to preach the Gospell.. [Page 501] [...] A [...] [...] [...], [...] [...] made a Booke of Recognitions. And it were more seemely for your selfe to reuoke your errours than to persist in a blind and [...] of Truth.

IESVIT. B

I adde therefore, secondly, the definitions of the three generall Councels celebrated before the breach of Luther from the Romane Church. The Councell of Florence, where­in Concil. Floren. in decreto Eugenij. 41. were present the Grecian and Armenian Bishops, where [...] is defined, that Christ is whole vnder each [...]. The Councell of [...], though they allowed the vse Concil. Basilien. sess. 30. of the Cup [...] the [...], defined the lawfulnesse of C Communion vnder one kind. The Councell of Constance gaue Concil. Constan­tiens. sess. 13. example vnto both these former Councels, being the first that defined this truth.

ANSVVER.

You adde nothing of any worth, for the Councels of Con­stance and Basil were in your owne eyes vncanonical and he ad­lesse, and are reiected by your selues in diuers articles Const. Concil. sess. 4. Basil. sess. 33. decree, That the Pope is inferiour to the Councell, and fallible in his iudgeme nt.: and D when you prooue (which will be Ad Calendas Graecas) that the three Synods, named by you, were generall Councells, it shall be granted that Communion in one kind is not destitute of ge­nerall Synodicall late Testimonie.

IESVIT.

The third argument, is the receiued and allowed gene­rall custome of the Church, which spontaneously euen be­fore the Councell of Constance, did abstaine from the Cup, E as the said Councell doth acknowledge: which may be proo­ued by the testimonies of many that liued before the Coun­cell of Constance. Yea Alexander Halensis (who liued two Halens. 4. p. q. 11. [...]. 2. a. 4. 55: 3. hundred yeares before the [...] of Constance) sayeth, [Page 502] That almost euerie where, Lay men receiued vnder the A sole for me of Bread. And venerable Bede doth signifie, Beda, Hist. Gent. Anglic. lib. 2. c. 5. & lib. 4. c. 14. That in the Church of England, euer since the first [...] of her vnder S. Gregorie, was vsed [...] vnder one kind for the Laitie: which could neuer haue entred into the Church, without being [...] and marked as an Heresie, had not the Church euer held Communion vnder one or both kinds, as a thing of indifferencie. B

ANSWER.

The Greeke Church alwayes receiued in both kinds (as your selues acknowledge) [...] before, pag. 482. therefore Communion in one kind was at no time an vniuersall Custome. Also Vasques Vasq. disp. 216. cap. 3. nu. 38. Ne­gare nō possumus [...] in Ecclesia Latina fuissevsum vtriusque speciei, & vsque ad tem­pora Sancti Tho­mae durasse. the Iesuit saith, Wee cannot denie, but that euen in the Latine Church, Communion in both kinds was vsed, and had conti­nuance vntill the age of Thomas Aquinas. Alexander de Hales affirmeth Alex. Hal. 4. q. 10. m. 4. §. 1. Sumpto hoc Sacramento dignè in [...] specie, maior est effectus vnionis corporis Mystici cum capite quàm sumpto sub altera. Ibid. q. 11. m. 2. ar. 4. §. 3. Sump­tio sub vtraque specie; quem modum fumendi tradidit Dominus, est maioris efficaciae, & complementi. Item, Licet illa sumptio quae est in accipiendo sub vna specie sufficiat, illa tamen quae est sub duabus, est ma­ioris meriti, tum ratione augumentationis deuotioris, tum ratione fidei dilatationis actualis., There is more Merit and power of Grace in Communion in both kinds, than in one. C

Lastly, you were guided with that Spirit which is mentio­ned 3. Kings 22. v. 21. when you affirme, That venerable Bede saith, in the Church of England, euer since her first Conuersion vnder S. Gregorie, Communion vnder one kind was in vse for D the Laitie. First, No such report is found in this Author: Secondly, In one of the Testimonies cited by your selfe, the contrarie is affirmed. For the two Apostles which are repor­ted to haue spoken to a certaine young Lad, say as follow­eth Beda, Hist. An­glorum, lib. 4. c. 14. pa. 132. Expectare habes, donec Mis­sae celebrantur, ac viatico Dominici corporis & sanguinis, accepto sic infirmitate simul & morte absolutus, ad aeterna in coelis gaudia sub­leueris. E: You must wait vntill the Masse or Communion be en­ded; and hauing then receiued the holy Food of the Lords Bodie and Bloud, you shall be deliuered from your infirmitie by Death, and exalted to coelestiall ioyes.

IESVIT.

The fourth Argument is drawne from many signes and tokens, that the Primitiue Church did sometimes vse [Page 503] Communion vnder one kind. First, the [...] receiued vn­der A the onely forme of Bread, as may appeare by the Hi­story of Serapion, related by Eusebius, and the Graecians Euseb. li. 6. Histor. ca. 36. ex Epist. Di­onis. Alex. ad Fabi­um. Genebrardus. Paulinus in vita Ambrosij. at this day though they giue the Cup to the Communicants in the Church, yet to the sicke they send the Sacrament vnder one kind. Yea S. Ambrose, as Paulinus relateth in his life, at his death receiued the Sacrament vnder the sole forme of Bread, and straight after the receiuing thereof gaue vp his soule. B

ANSWER.

First, touching Serapion, related by Eusebius, he receiued both Eus. Hist li. 6. c. 36. Bread and Wine: for the ladde which brought the Portion of the Eucharist, was commanded by the Priest, which sent him [...], to sop the Bread into Wine, and being moistened, to put it into the old mans mouth; and this was performed accordingly, [...], Particulā pu­er quam apporta­rat [...] si­ue intinctam in [...] senis [...]. the ladde wetted, or moistened the Portion of C Bread, which he receiued of the Priest, and infused the same into Serapion the old mans mouth; and the Councell of Towers, alleadged by Burchardus and Iuo Burchard. & Iuo. [...] vt Eucharistia quae in viaticum ex [...] re­seruatur, [...] sit in sanguinem Domini, vt vera­citer presbyter [...] possit, corpus & sanguis Domini Iesu Christi, prosit tibi in vitam aeter­nam., reporteth the manner and reason of dipping the Bread in this sort: We command, That the Eucharist which is [...] to be giuen sicke Persons, shall be dipped into the bloud of our Lord, that the Priest may say in truth, The body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ profit thee to life eternall. Which dipping sheweth that they thought it not sufficient to giue the sicke only the Bread.

Secondly, if Paulinus (of whom Erasmus Erasm. Censura ante opera Ambr. Idē est Artifex qui tam multa conta­minauit in scriptis Hieronimianis & Augustinianis na­tus ad hunc ludum. saith, it is the same D Craftsman, which hath corrupted so many things in the wri­tings of S. Hierome and S. Augustine) report truely touching S. Ambrose, this prooueth not, That Communion in one kind was in ordinary vfe, but that S. Ambrose being speechlesse, and without vnderstanding, and deceasing instantly after the Bread was put into his mouth Paulin. [...] Ambr. Qui descē ­dens [...] Sancti Domini corp' quo accepto vbi gluti­uit emisit spiritū., and consequently being preuented by death, receiued (by reason of this accident) one materiall part of the Sacrament onely.

IESVIT. E

Secondly, it was an antient custome in the Church to Tertul. li. 2. ad [...]. ca. 5. Basil. Epist. ad Cae­sar. [...]. Pra­tum [...]. ca. [...]. giue the Sacrament vnto Lay men, especially vnto Eremites, to be carryed in most pure linnen corporalls home to their [Page 504] houses, to be taken in the morning before all other meates, A but there is no signe or token in Antiquity, That the Faith­full, together with the consecrated Bread did carry away with them consecrated Wine: yea diuers Histories shew, the onely forme of Bread was carryed away, and conse­quently that the Church did not then esteeme of Communi­on [...] one kind, as of a Sacrilegious mayming of the Sa­crament, as Protestants now doe. B

ANSVVER.

It was an antient custome to send the Communion to Per­sons absent, in both kinds, as appeareth by the Historie of Exu­perius, in S. Hierome Hier. tom. 1. Ep. 4. Nihil Exu­perio ditius, qui corpus Domini ca­nistro vimineo, sa­guinem portat in vitro. Chrysost. to. 6. Ep. ad Innocent. Etiā sanguis Do­mini in Sacrario seruatur. Niceph. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 13. cap. 19.. And Gregorie Nazianzen Greg. Naz. Or. 11. in Laud. Gorgon. pag. 187. [...]. saith of his sister Gorgonia, if her hand had laid vp any Portion of the types or tokens of the pretious body, and of the bloud, &c. And as tou­ching sicke persons, Why should we not iudge, that the same order and proportion was kept in sending the Sacrament to them at their houses, as was obserued when sicke persons came to the Communion Table or Altar in the Church. C

IESVIT.

Thirdly, it was an antient custome in the Graecian Church, to consecrate the holy Eucharist on Saturdayes and Conc. Laodicen. Conc. 49. & Trul­lan. Can. 52. Sundayes; and on the other dayes of the weeke to communi­cate Ex praesanctificatis, of the praesanctified forme st hat D is consecrated on the Saturday or Sunday before. Now it is not probable, that they did consecrate Wine to indure fiue or sixe dayes long, for feare (specially in such hot Coun­treyes) the same should grow sower. Wherefore for the most part they did communicate vnder one kind.

ANSWER.

The Office of the Greeke Church, making mention of the E Sacramentall signes, consecrated or sanctified before they were vsed [...]. Graec. Bi­blioth. sanct. Patr. Sacerdotem post­quā sanctificaue­rit Panē, infundere Vinū in [...], & A quam, & [...], &c., nameth Bread and Wine: For thus wee reade in the same, That after the Priest hath sanctified the Bread, hee pow­reth Wine and Water into the sacred Cup, and rehearseth the accustomed words, &c. And the Liturgie Praesanctificatorum, [Page 505] of the Presanctified signes, according to Genebrards Genebrard. Li­turg. Myst. [...] consecrat. ex Cre­tensi codice. Ecce immaculatum cor­pus ipsius, & [...]. Sanguis hac nunc hora ingre­dientia in hac mē ­sa mystica sunt, qua multitudine celestis exercitus inuisibiliter [...], quorum communionem innocuam tribue nobis. [...], A speaketh both of the body and of the bloud presented in the mysticall signes. It appeareth also by Balsamon Balsam. Synod. 6. can. 52. [...]. B, vpon the 52 Canon of the Synod in Trullo, that both the Elements were consecrated at least vpon two seuerall dayes in the weeke; and Baronius Baron. Anno. 404. Haeretici negant asseruandam [...] Sacratissimam Eucharistiam, quam videmus non sub specie panis tantum, sed etiam sub specie vini olim recondi consueuisse. Habes id quoque probatum authoritate B. Gregorij, dum ait, in naui portasse nauigantes corpus & sanguinem Christi. Dialog. li. 3. ca. 36. acknowledgeth, That in antient times the Eucharist was reserued in both the kinds: now if it was consecrated and reserued in both kinds, Why should we imagine, that it was not deliuered and receiued in both kinds?

IESVIT.

Fourthly, the Manichees liued in Rome, and other pla­ces, Leo. Serm. 4. d. Quadrag. shrouding themselues among Catholikes, went to their Churches, receiued the Sacrament publikely with them, vnder the sole forme of Bread: and yet they were not no­ted, C nor there discerned from Catholikes. A manifest signe that Communion vnder one kind was publikely in the Church permitted at the least vpon some iust causes that might be pretended For how could the Manichees still re­fusing the Cup, haue beene hidden among these antient Christians, if they had beene persuaded, as now Prote­stants, that receiuing vnder one kind only is a Sacriledge? If one in the Church of England should refuse the Cup but D once in a publike Communion in the Church, would he not be incontinently noted?

ANSWER.

The holy Eucharist in the dayes of Pope Leo the first was ad­ministred in both kinds, and Romists could neuer as yet pro­duce any one sufficient testimonie or example, that so much as any one congregation of Christians in antient times receiued in the open Church vnder one kind. And although the place ob­iected E out of Leo Leo. d. Quadra­ges. serm. 4. pa. 173. ore [...] Chri­sti corpus [...], sanguinem au­tem Redemptor is nostri haurire, om­nino [...]. doth in speciall concerne the Manichees, yet it sheweth plainely that the present doctrine and practise of the Roman Church, is not consonant to the antient practise of the same Church. Neuerthelesse, our peruerse Aduersary argueth [Page 506] against vs out of this place of Leo, saying, That if the Commu­nion A had not sometimes beene administred vnder one kind, the Manichees practise, in refusing the Cup, could not haue passed vnmarked, but must necessarily haue beene obserued.

I answer: First, The Manichees were espied, and discouered; otherwise, how could the Pope reprooue their practise.

Secondly, Vasques Vasq. in 3. Disp. 216. c. 4. n. 42. vt se Catholicos simu­larēt, ita sumebant Calicē, vt sangui­nem non [...] in altera specie. the Iesuit saith, That these Heretikes receiued the Cup into their hand, but dranke no Wine; and among a multitude of Communicants, some few might hold the Cup to their mouth, and make shew of drinking, and yet receiue no Wine. B

IESVIT.

The last Argument, is practise of the Apostles, that is, of the first Christians vnder them, of whom wee reade in the Acts of the Apostles, Erant perseuerantes in Doctri­na Acts 2. 42. Apostolorum, & communicatione, fractionis Pa­nis, & Orationibus, speaking of sucred Eucharisticall Bread, the taking whereof was ioyned with Prayer, which C vnto the newly baptised was straight giuen after Bap­tisme: and yet there is no mention of Wine. So that Pro­testants, if they will haue these Christians to haue Wine, they must out of their owne liberalitie, by way of interpre­tation, bestow it vpon them, seeing the words of the Text doe not affoord it them. To this Apostolicall practise, wee may adde the example of Christ, who gaue to his two Dis­ciples in Emaus, the Sacrament vnder the sole forme of D Luc. 24. Bread. That the Bread Christ gaue, was Eucharisticall, Accepit Panem & benedixit & fre­git. August. lib. 3. d. Consensu Euan­gel. cap. 25. Bede & Theoph. in Luc. Hieron. in Epitaph. Paulae Isych. lib. 2. in Leuit. cap. 9. and consecrated, the words of the Text insinuate, some learned Fathers affirme, and the miraculous effect of ope­ning their eyes to know Christ, and their returne to Hie­rusalem and the Church of the Apostles in all hast, con­firmes it. That they receiued at the hands of Christ the Sacrament vnder one onely kind of Bread, is euident by the context of the Holy Narration, which saith, That E vpon our Sauiours breaking, and giuing them Bread, they knew him, and bee straight vanished out of their sight. So that here also, if Protestants will haue Wine giuen to these Disciples, they must by the superabundance thereof, [Page 507] in their Expositions, supply [...] want thereof in Scrip­ture; yea, the Scripture A in this place [...] capa­ble of that Exposition, the Apostles acknowledging of Christ in the verie fraction, and giuing of Bread, and our [...] departing in the same moment, leaues not­time for him, to giue them Wine after the Bread.

ANSWER.

Your last Argument is poore and drowsie, and perhaps you B imagine, that at this your Feast (if yet we may be said to drinke [...], sine Calice) we haue drunke well before, and therefore in the conclusion, you giue vs that which is worst, Iohn 2. 8.

The Antecedent, or leading part of your Argument, is du­bious, and the Consequence also is infirme. First, you are not able to prooue out of the Texts, Act. 2.42. or Luk. 24.30. that Christ and his Apostles in those places, administred the holy Communion: for there may be Prayer and breaking of Bread, and yet no Sacrament, 1. Tim. 4. v. 3.4.5. Also the place, Act. 2. C 42. may be vnderstood of dealing bread by Eleemosinarie dole to the poore. And although some of the Fathers apply these Scriptures to the Eucharist, according to the mysticall sence, yet other Fathers are contrarie Greg. Euang. Hom. 23. [...]. in Act. 2. 42. Eu­sebius Emissen. ho. 2. Feria. 2. Pasch., yea many Pontificians Lyra. in Luc. 24. Accepit panem, benedixit ac fregit, & porrigebat illis. Sicut consueuerat facere ante passionem: sic enim frangebat panem, ac si scinderetur cum cultello. Dionis. Carth. in Luc. 24. Accepit panem & benedixit, non tamen in suum corpus conuertit, sicut in [...], sed vt moris est benedicere cibum, in quo instruxit nos, vt ante refectionem benedicatur cibus & potus. Caietan. sup. Luc. 24. D Quatuor actiones Iesu circa panem describuntur, acceptio, benedictio, fractio, & porrectio, & tamen in sola fractione agnitus dicitur inferius: vt intelligamus, fractionem [...] miraculosam, hoc est quod frangebat panem manibus, sicut alij incidunt cultello. Solitum autem hunc frangendi modum [...] credimus, & propterea Discipuli ex consueto Iesu modo, cognouerunt eum. Gagneus. sup. Luc. 24. Cum viderunt assue­tam panis [...], agnouerunt eum. [...]. Harm. cap. 146. [...]. [...]. to. 4. lib. 8. cap. 12. Respondet Iansenius & alij, Christum non prebuisse his duobus Discipulis [...], erantenim impa­rati, neque tunc nouerant quid esset Eucharistia, non enim [...] extremae interfuerant. Willielm. Wids. c. Wiclif. Hie dico quod non habetur ex textu, vel exglossa, Luc. 24. vel per antiquos doctores, quod ille pa­nis quem Christus fregit post resurrectionem, fuit consecratus vel Sacramentalis. [...]. d. Sacram. d. Euchar. Disp. 4. q. 2. p. 3. Ad factum Christi in castello Emaus responderi potest, primo, non constare, Christum confecisse corpus suum, cum Discipuli non essent dispositi, [...] in fide. ex­pound these Texts, of common food or bread, and not of the Eucharist.

But if the first Exposition were true, yet Communion in E one kinde cannot be hence inferred; for either the words are proper, or figuratiue. If Romists will presse them, according to the letter, then no wine at all was then vsed by Christ, Luc. 24. or by the Apostles, Act. 2. and consequently, it follow­eth, [Page 508] [...], [...] A [...]. If they will yeeld, that there is a [...] in the words, then, euen as when wee reade in sundrie places of Scripture, That people meet toge­ther to [...] 31.34 [...]. 2.10, wee vnderstand by a part of the [...], the whole; not [...] wine, or other [...] in the [...] Texts, making literall mention of bread onely, must be vnder­stood, as mentioning a part of the spirituall Feast for the whole.

Neither is there any force in the Argument ensuing, which B is, Their eyes were opened to know Christ, Ergo; They [...] bread; for the eyes may be opened by Mi­racle, Grace, and by Donation of Faith, Act. 10. 14. without receiuing Eucharisticall Bread. The holy Eucharist, is not a sole or [...] cause of grace, [...] there are other caufes and meanes besides: and therefore the Illation is inconsequent, [...] an effect which may proceed from diuers and fundrie [...] to one speciall and determinate efficient cause.

But the Aduersarie proceedeth, saying, That after breaking of bread, Christ straight way vanished out of their sight, and C they hastened to Hierusalem with all speed. Therefore there was no space after receiuing the Bread, for the sumption of Wine.

The Reader may perceiue by these, and other such like wri­things of the Text, vpon what foundation Popish Faith is buil­ded. First, The word, Straight wayes, is not in the Narration, Luke 24. Secondly, The receiuing a small quantitie of Wine, could neither hinder our Sauiours expedition, nor the Apo­stles iourney to Ierusalem. Thirdly, How appeareth it, that re­ceiuing Eucharisticall Bread, made the Disciples more agile in D bodie, and prompter in minde to trauell to Hierusalem: for two Disciples ranne to the Sepulchre, with as much allacritie and expedition as was possible, [...]. 20. 4, and yet they had at that present time receiued no Eucharisticall Bread. Yea, on the con­trarie, the Apostles of Christ, after the receiuing of the holy Eucharist, doe all of them flie away and forsake their Master, Math. 26.58. This collection therefore, The Disciples hasted to Hierusalem, Ergo, They receiued the Eucharist, is dissolute, and not much vnlike that of Pope Boniface the eight, God said, Let vs make two great lights, Ergo, The Pope is greater than the E Emperour.

IESVIT. A

These bee the Warrants that Communion vnder one kinde hath, being the greatest that may bee: whereby ap­peares, that the Roman Church is furnisht with all kinde of proofe in this point, in which she doth seeme to her Ad­uersaries to be most forsaken of Antiquitie. Now suppo­sing Communion vnder one kinde to be good and lawfull, That the Church could preseribe it, and, That shee had iust B reasons to prescribe it, J will let passe without proofe, as a thing not doubted of by your Maiesties excellent wisedome.

ANSVVER.

All your warrants for halfe Communions, are meere Impo­stures, and audacious words and figments, Commota semel, & excussa mens, ei seruit à quo impellitur (saith Seneca,) The mind which is disordered and put out of frame, becomes a slaue to that which impells it. This is verified in you, you want all kinds of iust defence for your Sacriledge in mangling and dis­membring C the holy Communion, yet hauing once ouershot your selues, and become slaues to your owne conceit, of not be­ing subiect to errour, Litigare magis quam sanari vultis, you chuse rather to make warre with heauen, than to retract your errour; for they warre with heauen, which oppose the Testa­ment of the Sonne of God, the Tradition of the holy Apo­stles, and the practise of the Primitiue Church: and this is your case, although you list not to see it, or rather seeing, to acknow­ledge it. D E

THE EIGHT POINT. A WORKES OF SV­PERERROGATION B SPECI­ALLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TREASVRE OF THE CHVRCH.

IESVIT.

IT is hard, if not impossible, to C giue satisfaction in this point, vnto any that is not aforehand persuaded of the Ca­tholicke Doctrine of Merit.

ANSVVER.

THe word or name of merit is ta­ken D in two notions: First, properly, strictly, and vniuocally, Ro. 4.4. Deu. 7.10. Secondly, improperly, largely, and equiuocally, Eccle. 16.15. The first is tearmed by Schoolemen, Merit of Condignitie Fauent. 3. sent. d. 18. Disp. 42. ca. 2. Meritū. d. Con­digno est aliquid, cui ex rigore iustitiae, debetur merces & praemium, [...] quod si illi non reddatur fit in­iuria. Scot. 1. Dist. 17. q. 1. ar. 1. Caiet. 1.2. q. 114. ar. 4. Andrad. Orth. Explicat. lib. 6. pag. 599. Ipsum con­grui nomen indicat, [...] a [...] meritum esse, cui [...] iure debeatur, sed quod Dei miseri­cordia, E magis quam iustitia nititur. Bellarm. d. Iust. li. 1. cap. 21. Fatemur omni merito respondere merce­dem, sed sicut meritum quoddam esse dicimus ex congruo, ità mercedem quandam esse dicimus ex con­gruo, quae magis debeatur ex gratia quam ex iustitia. Vega. d. Iustif. lib. 8. cap. 10. Quandoquè strictè & in rigore hoc verbum capitur, & meritum appellatur actio libera, cui debetur ex iustitia praemium aliquod, seu merces. A lias vero meritum, largè dicitur, actio libera acceptata ad aliquod praemium, vel ex debito, vel ex pacto, seu conditione vel conuentione, aut simplicitèr ex gratia, & generalitèr quodcunquè opus, quod impetrat apud aliquem mercedem aliquam, vel praemium, & causa est collationis ipsius.; and the latter Me­rit of Impetration or of Congruitie.

[Page 511] If the Iesuit maintaine Merit, according to the first accepta­tion, A then out of all question the Doctrine of Merit is not Ca­tholicke Reade before pag. 172. Durand. 2. d. 27. q. 2. nu. 12. Quod redditur potiùs ex liberalitate dantis, quam ex debito operis, non cadit sub merito de condigno strictè & propriè accepto, vt expositum est. Sed quicquid à Deo accipimus, siuè sit gratia siuè [...] gloria, siuè bonum temporale, vel spirituale (praecedente in nobis proptèr hoc quocunque bono opere) potius & principalius accipimus ex liberalitate Dei, quam reddatur ex debito operis, ergo nihil penitus cadit sub merito de condigno sic accepto..

If he maintaine Merit, according to the second notion, then Popes pardons, and workes of Supererogation cannot be inferred or concluded from the doctrine of Merit; for how B can that action bee applied to other persons as satisfactorie, which is rewarded by God, of his free fauour and grace, aboue the desert of the person himselfe which hath wrought it?

IESVITS §. 1. The Doctrine of Merit declared.

THis Doctrine is much misliked by Protestants as C proud and arrogant, yet not so much misliked as mis­understood, their dislike growing from misconstru­ction thereof. For Catholickes hold that no worke is me­ritorious with God of it owne nature: but to make the same meritorious, many graces are required, and those most diuine and excellent, particularly these seuen.

ANSVVER. D

CAn any thing be more arrogant and foolish, than for a mi­serable begger and sinner Aug Ep. 106. Pauperego & do­lens, qui adhuc terrenae imaginis squalore concre­tus sum, & plus de primo quam de secūdo Adam car­nis sensibus & terrenis actibus refero, &c. Jdem. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 19. ca. 27. Ipsa quoquè nostra iustitia quamuis vera sit proptèr veri boni finem ad quem refertur, tamen tanta est in hac vita, vt potius peccato­rum E remissione [...], quam perfectione virtutum., whose iustice is rather in re­mission of sinnes, than in perfection of vertues Rhem. Annot Heb. 6. n. 4. These words make it most cleere to all not blinded in pride and contention, that good workes be meritorious, and the very cause of saluation, so far that God should be vniust if he rendred not heauen for the same. Altisiod. sum. li. 3. tr. 12. q. 2. Mereri de condigno est facere de debito debitum, vel de debito magis debitum, ità quod iniustè agitur cum eo nisi reddatur ei quod meruit, Ergo, Deus iniustè ageret cū eo, nisi reddatur ei quod meruit. Bell. d. Iust. li. 5. c. 16. Res. Non esse temerarium nec blasphemū sed pium & sanctum dicere, Deum fore iniu­stum si non seruaret promissa., to main­taine that God should be vniust, if he rendred not heauen to mans good workes? And yet this proud Doctrine is deliuered by the Rhemists, and by some other Romists.

[Page 512] But our Aduersarie laboureth by distinction, to salue this A Pharisaisme, saying, Good workes are not meritorious by their nature, but by many graces, &c.

I answer, If he should maintaine, that Good workes merit iustification or perseuerance, not by their Nature, but by Grace, this distinction would not free his Tenet from error Ibid. cap. 12. 21.22.: so likewise it is erroneus to maintaine that Good works merit glo­rie by Grace; for that which is of Merit, is not of Grace Andrad. Or­thod. Explic. lib. 6. pag. 518. Paulus cum demonstrare statuit Abraham fide fuisse instifi­catum, & non ex operibus, hac vna potissimum id ra­tione efficit, ei qui operatur merces non imputatur se­cundum gratiā, sed secundum debitum, Ergo si iustitia Abrahae esset operum, illius merces, debitum sanè potius, quam gratia dici debuisset. but of debt. And diuine grace doth not eleuate vertuous actions, by adding vnto them a force of meriting Gregor. Arimin. 2. Sent. d. 17. q. 1. ar. 2., but onely by making them susceptible of a free and liberall reward, and by placing B them in the state and order of causes impetrant, or dispositiue conditions. S. Paul saith, Rom. 8.18 Durand. 2. d. 27. q. 2. nu. 3. Inter opera meritoria maximè videntur esse meritoriae Sanctorū passiones, & tamen illae non sunt meritoriae de condigno. Dicitenim Apostolus ad Romanos. 8. Non sunt condignae passiones huius tem­poris ad futuram gloriam.. I thinke that the Passions of this time are not condigne to the glorie to come, that shall be reuealed in vs.

First, the passions here expressed, were Martyredomes san­ctified C by grace, Phil. 1.29. and spirituall sacrifices of a sweete smelling sauour, 2. Tim. 4. 6. most pretious in Gods sight, Psalm. 116.15.

Secondly, Condignitie or Worthinesse, equall in desert or value to the reward of glorie, is denyed vnto them: but where there is inequalitie betweene the worke and the reward, and where the reward is of Grace, and the worke of debt, there is found no proportion of Condignitie. Origen Origen. Sup. Rom. 4. Vix mihi suadeovllum opus esse posse, quod ex debito remunera­tionem Dei de­poscat. Chrys. in 2. Cor. Hom. 23. De­us hoc in merce­dem imputat; non quod iustis nobis debeat, sed quod misericors est, & pius. saith, I can hardly persuade my selfe, that there can be any good worke D deseruing (as a debt) the reward of God. S. Augustine August. tr. 3. in Ioh. Non pro me­rito quidem accipies vitam aeternam, sed tantum pro gratia., Thou shall not receiue eternall life for thy Merit, but only for Grace. Andreas Vega Vega. Opusc. quest. 4. saith, That many Schoole-men, to wit, Gregorie Arimine Gregor. [...]. 1. d. 17. q. 1. ar. 2., Durand Durand. 1. d. 17. q. 2. & lib. 2. d. 27. q. 2. & lib. 3. d. 18. q. 2., Marsilius Marsil. 2. q. 18. ar. 3., Waldensis Waldensis. d. Sacram. tit. 1. cap. 7. nu. 5. Pelagiana Haeresis quod Deus secundum men­suram operum meritoriorum praemiabit hominem sic merentem, &c. Reputo igitur saniorem Theolo­gum, E fideliorem Catholicum, & Scripturis Sanctis magis concordem, qui tale meritum simplicitèr abne­gat, & cum modificatione Apostoli & Scripturarum concedit, quia simplicitèr quis non meretur reg­num Coelorum sed ex gratia Dei, aut voluntate largitoris., Burgensis [...] sup. Psal. 35., Eckius Eckius. Centur. d. Praedest., &c. reiect the Romish doctrine of merit of Condignitie, Dio­nisius [Page 513] Cistertiensis doth the like Dionis. Cistert. lib. 3. Sent. Dift. 1. q. 2. ar. 3. & li. 4. d. 43. q. 3. ar. 1. Cum dicitur iste puta Socrates [...] vitam aeternam, duplex potest esse Sensus, primus. Illi ex valore ope­ris sui debetur il­lud praemium vl­timum, scz. vita [...]. Secundus, Socrates meretur vitam aeternam, id est, Socrati gratio­se praeparauit De­us, non solū opus quod vocatur me­ritum, sed etiam pro illo opere prae­parauit [...] (licet merè [...]) ali­ud [...] longe melius, [...] vi­tam aeternam, si­cut dicit Aposto­lus ad Rom. 6. Gratia Dei vita aeterna, Quià non solum secundum opera sed secundū propositum, & gratiam quae est data nobis in Christo [...] nos [...]. 2. Tim. 1.. Brulifer saith Brulif. 2. d. 27. q. 6. [...] purus viator [...] mereri coelestem gloriam de condigno, [...] meretur tantum meretur illam de congruo. Et ista opinio est valde deuota & fulcitur multis authoritatibus., It is a verie de­uout A opinion established by many authorities, that no man in this life (how pure and perfect soeuer) can merit coelestial glorie by [...], but that, [...] by [...] or [...] [...]. d. lib. Arbit. lib. 5. pag. [...]. [...]. [...] [...]. in Math. 20 voca [...], &c. [...] of [...] [...]. Aduert in 8. to. Aug. [...]. 13. Scotus negat meritum de condigno, & tenet quod vltra gratiam tale opus acceptaturad gloriam. [...]. And [...] [...]. in 1. 2. [...]. 213. cap. 6. nu. 31. Qui [...] equum pro obsequio, [...] pecunia [...] valoris, [...] praetium & valorem [...], aut [...], pro quo illum esset pollicitus, sed eodem modo [...] quod daretur ex pro­missione illud minimum praetium & [...], & [...] non intercessissent. the Iesuit [...]. That the Roman Church hath not hither­to determined expressely the question of [...] of condigni­tie: and the same author, with others [...]. in 1. 2. q. 114. ar. 10. Meritum de congruo, non est meritum simplicitèr sed impropriè & secundum D quid, [...] Orth. Explic. lib. 6. pag 509. Vasques. 1. 2 disp. 214. ca. 5. h. 26. [...]. d Praedest. & Reprob. § 3. pag. 299. Sicut si magnus Monarcha alicui propter [...] promitteret & daret statum Regium, quis non dixerit hoc totum esse gratiam Principis? [...]; That Merit of congruitie is not truly, properly, & simply Merit, but [...] quid & nomine tenus, comparatiuely, and in appellation on­ly. B And they deliuer a good reason of this assertion: for if for a small labour and seruice, or if for a seruice and obedience due of right by other titles, a liberall and immense gift shall be be­stowed, there is no Merit in the receiuer, but the reward is meerely of [...] in the bestower: So likewise when God Almightie bestoweth vpon his children an incomparable weight of glorie [...]. 1. d. 17. ar. 1. Posito tali habitu (Charitatis) adhuc meritum est multo infirmius & minus [...] quàm [...], nulla autem iustitia nec commutatiua, nec distributiua exigunt, vt pro minori bono reddatur magis bonum., for a small and imperfect seruice, and for that which is due vnto himselfe in right, by many other titles; this reward is not a wages of debt, neither is God obliged in iustice Durand. 2. d. 27. q. 2. n. 18. Qui totum habet ab alio, totum ei debet, nec potest eum debitorem constituere quod re­quiritur ad meritum de condigno. to bestow it, but it is a reward of Grace and bountie, C and man is indebted to God for promising and bestowing the same.

Now from hence it is apparent that the doctrine of Merit (taken properly Durand. ibid. Meritum hominis apud Deum non potest esse meritū simplicitèr, de cō ­digno sed [...] secundū [...] diui­nae ordinationis: [...] scilicet, vt homo id consequatur à Deo per suam operationem quasi praemium vel [...].) is not Catholicke or infallible, and there­fore if Popes pardons depend vpon the same, a worme-eaten post is made the pillar and supporter of this moath-eaten rag E of supererogation, wherwith the Romists would gayly cloath their children.

IESVIT A

The first grace is [...], because God out of his owne [...] and his actions [...] a [...] [...] without which Ordination, no [...] or correspondencie with [...].

ANSWER. B

By Diuine preordination, vertuous actions haue reference (not of desert, but of disposition, and instrumentall efficien­cie or manuduction) to beatitude, or the last supernaturall [...] and according to Saint Bernard [...]. d. lib. [...]. Si [...] appellen­tur ca quae [...] nostra meri­ta, [...] [...]., they are Via regni, non causa regnandi, The way to the heauenly Kingdome, but not the (me­ritorious) cause of raigning.

IESVIT. C

The second, is the Grace of Redemption by Christ Ie­sus, without whom, wee and our workes are defiled, wee being by nature the children of wrath, and should bee so still, had not hee by his Passion and Death appeased God, [...] vs the inestimable treasure of his merits: so that, In illo, benedixit nos Deus omni benedictione spi­rituali D Ephes. 1. 3. & 7. in caelestibus, in quo habemus redemptionem per sanguinem eius, secundum diuitias gratiae suae quae superabundauit in nobis.

ANSVVER.

The grace of Redemption appeaseth God, and purchased for vs the fruit and inestimable benefit of Christs Merits, both for remission of our sinnes, and for our Sanctification. But E that Christs Merits make mans actions meritorious, and that his satisfaction inableth man to satisfie Gods Iustice [...]. d. Colonia. Quest. Magistral. q. 363. Satisfactio est redditio eius quod debetur se­cundum iustitiā., is all one, as if one would inferre, saying, Christ Iesus hath redee­med vs by his Passion, and he communicates to vs the grace of Redemption, Ergo, Christ Iesus hath made vs Redeemers.

IESVIT. A

The third is grace of Adoption in Baptisme, whereby soules are supernaturally beautified by participation of the diuine nature; whence a triple dignity redounds vnto Works, one by the grace of Adoption from God the Father, who in respect of this Adoption regards good works as the works of his children; Another is from God the holy Ghost B dwelling in vs, by whom Good workes are honoured, as by the principall Author of them, so that he, rather than we, doth the works; who therefore is said to pray for vs with Rom. 8. 26. vnspeakable groanes: The last dignitie is from God the Son, Christ Iefus, whose members we are made by Grace; so that the works we doe, be reputed not so much ours as his, as the worke of the particular members is attributed prin­cipally vnto the head.

ANSWER. C

By the grace of Regeneration and Adoption, the diuine Image is imprinted in the soule, 2. Pet. 1. 4. Ephes. 4.24. and a dignitie of goodnesse Bellar. d. Iustif. li. 1. ca. 21. Speaking of the merit of con­gruitie or impetrati­on. [...] meritum inchoatum & im­perfectum, & habet aliquam dignita­tem & proportio­nem ad suum fi­nem, sed non tan­tam quantam re­quirit meritum de condigno. redounds to vertuous actions from the three persons of the Trinity. But hence it followeth not, Ergo, Good workes merit in condignitie: for although Christ Iesus and the holy Ghost worke in righteous People, and the vertu­ous deedes of these Persons are in some sort reputed the works of Christ; yet because the diuine Persons worke in them accor­ding to a certaine degree, and measure of grace, and not accor­ding D to the fullnesse of Power, and the vertuous deeds of men, are attributed to Christ, not as the cause Elicitiue Vasq. 1. 2. Disp. 214. ca. 7. [...]. 44. Cum opera nostra non alia ratione tribuantur Christo, tanquam capiti mystico, nisi quia ab eo accipimus gratiam, iustitiam & auxilia omnia, nequaquam autem sicut elicienti illa, fit vt minime accipiant dignitatem, neque dignitatis incrementum à Christo, sed solum à persona ipsa eliciente suam [...] iustitiae & Sanctitatis. Alioquin [...] nostra opera esse infiniti valoris, &c. Tapia. d. Incarnat. Christ. q. 21. ar. 10. Vt recte docet Caietanus quamuis ea satisfactio capiti Christo innitatur; non tamen recipit eandem cum satisfactione Christi aequalitatem, sicut imperfecta participant quidem a perfectis esse, & posse, non tamen illis aequantur Nec veto digitus, quamuis [...] influxum à [...], plenam eius vim & perfectionem recipit, & quidem si satisfactio hominis iusti vt est membrum Christi, est perfecta simpliciter, & E [...], & omnis [...] est membrum Christi: Sequitur quod cuiuseunque hominis iusti [...] est in [...] perfecta, & quidem pro omni culpa, & poena quod est vehementer falsum. [...] ergo de­bemus quod aliud est aliquam operationem [...] Deo, vt personae propriae & non mystice loquendo, earum operatio erit infiniti valoris, & [...] ac meriti: aliud vero & longe diuersum est aliquam operationem vniri Deo vt causae vniuersali, atque personae mysticae. Tunc enim [...] operatio pro [...] influentis [...] vim & efficaciam., or as im­mediately producing them, it is inconsequent to say: Good [Page 516] workes are produced originally by the holy Ghost, and they A are reputed Christs works, in regard of Influence, Approbati­on, and Acceptation, Ergo, they haue the totall Perfection (to wit, of meriting and satisfying) which Christs owne Personall workes had. The foot of man is vnited to the head, and the head maketh influence into it: neuerthelesse the whole perfe­ction of the head, is not in the foot, and the foot doth not vn­derstand, because the head vnderstandeth; nor seeth, heareth, or smelleth, although these senses are [...] in the head. So like­wise euery iust person is vnited to Christ, and is spiritually san­ctified by the Grace of the holy Ghost: but this motion and B influence is finite in it selfe, and limited to the estate of our weakenesse, [...] distributed according to the necessitie of the Receiuer, and the wisedome and good pleasure of the moouer, and therefore it imparteth not the whole vertue of the moouer, but so much onely as is necessarie and conuenient for the Sub­iect to receiue: but it is not necessary for men to receiue power of meriting properly, and it is most honourable for God to be­stow life eternall freely.

IESVIT. C

The fourth is Grace praeuenient, whereby God stirreth vp in vs thoughts and affections to good and pious workes: and grace adiuuant to helpe vs in the perfor­mance of these desires, making our free will produce works that are supernaturall in their very substance, and aboue the capacitie of man.

ANSWER. D

The free will of man, by the power of praeuenient, adiuuant, and subsequent Grace, produceth works which are supernatu­rall in their kind: but yet this free will being Principium vulnera­tum Bonauentur. 3. d. 20. q. 4. Vicium humanae originis nunquam sepera­tur a carne pec­cati., an originall roote, or beginning of Action, which was wounded with sinne, and is in this life cured onely in part, it al­wayes retayneth some remainders of inborne infirmitie, and consequently the good Actions produced by it, attaine not the fullnesse of Perfection, but there is found in them some haeredi­tary staine or limping Greg. in 2. Psa. Poenitential. San­cti viri licet magnis iam virtutibus polleant habent tamen adhuc de culpae obscuritate quod [...], & licet iam magna vitae claritate luceant, aliquas tamen peccati nebulas velut quasdam noctis reliquias trahunt. Hieron. in [...]. 13. Aug. Enchir. ca. 64. Bernard. in [...]. Omnium [...]. Ser. 1. Vega. d. [...]. li. 11. ca. [...]. Cassal. d. Quadrup. Iust. li. 3. ca. 23 Reade before Pag. 171. 172. Tertul. d. Anima. ca. 23. In optimis nonnihil est pessimi, solus enim Deus sine peccato.. Rom. 7. 18, 19, 20.23. Gal. 5. 17. E [Page 517] Heb. 12. 1. Hence it followeth, that iust men cannot challenge A a reward by merit or debt, because they neuer yeeld God his full and perfect due Chrys. in Ge­nes. ho. 22. Talis est spiritualis de­biti natura, quod quanto magis [...], tanto [...] debetur.: for it is his due to [...] without any sinne adherent, but righteous Persons [...]. Iam. 3.2. Therefore they can challenge nothing of Debt, or as [...] of God, but onely [...] with humilitie vpon his bounty and [...] Greg. in 1. [...]. Poenit. Non de meis meritis confi­dens, vt me saluum [...] non de meis meritis spero..

IESVIT.

The fift, is the Grace of mercifull indulgence, in not B [...] with vs the rigor of his [...]. For God might wholy require the good worke we [...] his owne, by many [...] as by the [...] of Iustice, being works of his [...]; by title of Religion, being workes of his Creatures; by title of gratitude, as being workes of persons infinitely obliged vnto him. By which Tytles, if God did exact vpon workes with vttermost rigor, no goodnesse would be left in them to be offered for the meriting of heauen. But his infinite C benignitie remitting this rigor, moued thereunto through the merits of Christ, is content that we make vse of our good workes for the gaining of glorie, and doth not exact them wholy and totally as otherwise due.

ANSWER.

The Lord is content that we make vse of our good workes for the attaining and increase of glorie. Mat. 25.16.2. Cor. 9. 6. Gal. 6.8. And he requireth them also for many other good ends, D Ioh. 15.8. 2. Pet. 1.10. But they may be vsed and referred to life eternall, as dispositions and causes impetrant, and not as causes properly or condignely meritorious. Also it is remarke­able, how the Iesuit in this section, hath set fire on his owne house: for if we we owe good works vnto God by the titles of Iustice, Religion, and Gratitude, What peeping hole I pray you is left for aspiring Merit to creepe in at? The true applica­tion whereof is, That if God exact according to his due, then (vpon the Aduersaries owne ground) there is no Merit. But if he E doe not in rigor exact, then this indulgence and not exacting, for Christs sake, taketh away all plea of Merit from vs, and cast­eth the Merit vpon Christ alone.

IESVIT.

The sixt, is the grace of liberall promise, by which he obli­geth [Page 518] [...] himselfe to reward the good Workes of his children ac­cording A to the deserv of their goodnesse. Did not God binde himselfe by his word in this manner, no worke of Saints though neuer so perfect and excellent, were able to bind [...] to reward it, as all [...] teach; though some disputation be, whether Gods liber all [...] supposed, the goodnesse of the [...] concurre partially with his promise to oblige him, which is a Disputation of no great moment.

ANSVVER. B

First, the promise of God whereby he obligeth himselfe to [...] a benefit to his People vpon their obedience, inferreth not desert Durand. 2. d. 27. q. 2. n. 15. Pro­missio diuina in Scripturis sanctis, non [...] in ali­quam obligatio­nem, sed [...] meram dispositio­nem [...] diuinae. [...] est [...] quod [...] non ex debito precedentis operis, sed [...] promissione pre cedente non quidem [...] ex merito operis de [...] sed solum [...] principaliter ex promisso. Bassol. 2. d. 27. ar. 4. Sicut si alicuj promit­teretur C regnum pro [...], [...] leuaret festucam deberetur [...], non ex condignitate actus le­uandi [...], sed [...]. [...]. [...] d. 20. q. 1. Quilibet obligatur ex promisso, Deus au­tem promisserat, &c. [...] quod verba Scripturae, &c. non insinuant promissionem ex parte Dei, sed sim­plicem eius [...] & [...] [...] & sic non est ibi aliquod [...]. or merit on their part, as appeareth in repentance, whereunto the Lord promiseth mercie, remission of sinnes, and saluation, and obligeth himselfe by oath, Ezech. 18.31, 32. & ca. 33.11. and yet the benefit conferred is not of Merit, but of Grace.

d Greg. Papa Moral. li. 9. ca. 27. Si remota pietate discutimur, opus nostrum poena dignum est, quod remunerari prae­mijs postulamus. God Almighty promised to bestow the land of Canaan vpon the Israelites, and he bound himselfe thereto by oath, Exod. 13. 5. Neuerthelesse, he gaue this good land to them, not for their owne merits, but of his free bountie. Deut. 7. v. 7, 8, & chap. 9. 5. Secondly, it is false, that God hath obliged himself by promise to reward the good Works of his children according to the de­sert D of their goodnesse; for he rewardeth them according to his owne bountie [...]. Quod. lib. 17. [...]. 2. Talis dignitas in Actu nihil est nisi accep­tatio passiua, vo­luntatis diuinae., but not according to their own defert, yea he re­wardeth aboue desert Greg. Arimin. 1. d. 17. q. 1. ar. 2. Huic etiam concordat commune dictum Doctorum dicentiū quod Deus praemiat [...] condignum., and in part contrary to desert, Ps. 103.10.

Thirdly, the disputation of Schoolemen, whether Gods liberall promise supposed, the goodnesse of the worke concurre partially with the diuine promise to oblige God, is of so great moment, that Vasques the Iesuit saith Vasques 1. 2. Disp. 214. c. 5. n. 23. Doctores, &c. bo­nis operibus secū ­dum se dignitatem negantes, totam dignitarem nostrorum operum referunt in Dei [...] & acceptatio­nem per Christi merita, quod quidem nihil aliud est, quam veram & perfectam rationem meriti, solis Christi operibus ascribere., They which hold the E former without teaching the latter, destroy Merit, teaching the same in words, and really denying it.

IESVIT. A

Finally, That Merit attaine reward, is required the grace of perseuerance: without which, no man is crowned. And though Good workes, strengthened with so many su­pernatur all Excellencies, bee good stayes of confidence, in themselues considered; yet because we are not sure of our perseuerance, no nor altogether certaine that we haue good Workes, adorned with the former perfections; the Catho­licke B Saints of God vse not to confide in their Merits past, specially being guiltie of diuers daily negligences, but flie to Gods mercies, as the Church teacheth vs in the Liturgie of the Masse, daily praying, In sanctorum nos consortium non aestimator meriti sed veniae quaesumus largitor admitte.

ANSWER. C

Without perseuerance, no man can attaine the Crowne of Glorie, Apoc. 2.10. and yet, as perseuerance it selfe is the free gift of God, Ierem. 32.40. 1. Cor. 1.8. Phil. 1. 6. so likewise the Crowne of Glorie, following perseuerance, is of Grace, and not of Merit, Rom. 6.23.

Secondly, Good workes are stayes and supporters of confi­dence Cyprian. d. oper. & Eleemos. n. 24. Praeclara & diui­na res est salutaris operatio, solatium grande credentiū, securitatis nostrae salubre praesidiū, munimentū spei, tutela fidei, mede­la peccati. Chrys. [...]. Math. [...]. 15. Sicut oleum accendit Iumen Eucernae: ita & bona opera excitant fidem cordis & dant confidentiam animae: Idem. in. 2, Cor. Hom. 2. At nos optamus [...] benefactis habeas fiduciam. Ber­nard. in Cant. ser. 3. Quantum crescis in gratiam, tanto dilataris in fiduciam. Greg. Mor. l. 10. c. [...]. [...] minus iudicem formidat, quanto in bonis actibus solidius stat., Heb. 3.6. 1. Ioh. 3.21. Psal. 119. 166. And iust men may know that they haue Faith and Good workes, Esa. 38.3. Ioh. 29.14. Psal. 119.22, 67, 100, 110, 112, 157, 166. Also they are regenerate, of immortall seed, 1. Pet. 1. 23. And hee that is begotten of God, ouercommeth the world, and keepeth D himselfe, and that wicked One toucheth him not, 1. Ioh. 5. v. 4. 18. And so by Grace, they are inabled to perseuere to the end, Phil. 4.13. Ioh. 4.14. & 6.37. 2. Thes. 3.3.

Thirdly, Although all good Christians are studious of Good workes, 1. Ioh. 3.7. Mat. 7.17. Iohn 15.5. yet no true Catho­licke Christian glorieth or confideth in his owne Merits Bern. serm. 1. fest. om. sanctor. Quid potest esse omnis iustitia [...] coram [...] velut pannus [...] districtè iudicetur, iniusta inuenietur omnis iustitia nostra & minus habens. [...] ergo de peccatis erit, quando ne ipsa quidem per se poterit respondere iustitia? Proprerea [...] cum Propheta cla­mantes, ne intres in [...] cum seruo tuo Domine, tota humilitate ad [...] quae sola potest saluare animae nostras., or E [Page] expecteth saluation for his owne deserts. And the reason here­of, A is not the vncertaintie of his owne Sanctification Aug. Psal. 149. Est quidam mo­dus in conscientia gloriandi, vt noue­ris fidē tuam esse sinceram, noueris spem tuam esse certain noueris charitatem tuam esse sine simulatione., but a true vnderstanding of his owne [...], to Merit con­dignely at Gods hand, and of his owne vnworthinesse (euen supposing the state of Grace, &c.) to receiue the Crowne of Glorie, by any other purchase, than by the free donation and Merit of Christ Aug. [...]: lib. 9. cap. 13. Vae etiam [...] vitae, si remota misericordia discutias eam, &c. [...] Psal. 142. Noli mecum [...] iudicium Domine Deus mi. [...] rectus mihi videar, producis tu de thesauro tuo regulam, [...]. B, Luk. 17.10. Rom. 6.23. Psal. 143.2.

IESVIT.

Did Protestants know that we require all these diuine [...] to make any worke meritorious, did they well also [...] how singular and excellent these fauours are, they [...] not perchance wonder, that Workes graced with so many supernaturall excellencies, should haue some propor­tion with the heauenly reward. And so dealing with your C Maiestie; who is well able to ponder these things, I shall without proofe passe by this Doctrine, as not particularly belonging to the proposed difficultie.

ANSWER.

Protestants are not ignorant what Romists require, to make Workes meritorious; but withall, they vnderstand that the se­uen Graces rehearsed by you in this place, are not sufficient to infuse a [...] causalitie or efficiencie intothem. D

c [...]. 2. d. 27. q. 2. n. 10. Et [...]. [...]. 1. 2. Disp. 214. c. 1. n. [...]. Eo quod me­rita & opera [...] dicantur semen vitae aeter­nae ac proinde me­taphoricè solum dicenda sint [...] non [...] ratione nisi [...] Deus [...] vt [...] vitam [...]. [...] 3. d. 20. q. 1. Nulla [...] obligationis, tenetur Deus cuicunq, [...] Ib. q. 2. Hoc est [...] sibi debitum & debitorem. And some proportion with the heauenly reward, maketh not vertuous actions to be condignely meritorious: for there is proportion of Order, yea, of instrumentall causalitie, and of meanes to the end, and there is proportion of Equalitie, or [...]. The first kind of proportion maketh not the cause or meanes meritorious, as appeareth in Faith and contri­tion, in respect of remission of sinnes; and of Regeneration, [...] respect of the heauenly inheritance; and there was some [...] betweene the [...] through the Wilder­nesse E, and the land of [...], yet the [...] trauell was not a meritorious cause of their possession of that good Land.

[Page 521] His [...] therefore, being of a [...] iudgement, A is well able to ponder these things, and to discerne, that you hauing deliuered as much in substance for your Doctrine of Me­rit as the matter will beare, yet haue in effect said nothing, but that which is refelled by some of your owne part, and which is insufficient to demonstrate, That the Roman doctrine of Me­rit is Catholicke.

And to conclude this Paragraph, I desire ingenious Rea­ders, not to be abused by the equiuocations of Romists, who wilfully peruert the Testimonies of Councells, and Fathers, to establish the erroneous Doctrine of Merit of condignitie: for B enteruiewing the places, you shall perceiue, that the Fathers frequently applying the word Merit, to vertuous Actions, speake of obtention and impetration, and not of meriting in condignitie: yea, as the learned Pontifician Andreas Vega Reade Vega d. Iustif. l. 8. c. 6.7.8. And my Defence of my Brother D. Iohn White, pa. 40. & 41. ob­serueth, they often apply the word Merit, to Actions, in which there is neither Merit of condignitie nor congruitie.

IESVIT. § 2. C Merit of Workes of Super­erogation.

WHerefore to come to workes of Supererogation; These workes, besides the seuen aforenamed gra­ces, suppose another singular fauour, and stand grounded thereon. This [...] is, That God, though [...] might, yet he doth not [...] require of his Saints and D seruants, That in his [...] they doe the vttermost of their forces. He hath prescribed vnto men certaine Lawes and Commandements, which if they keepe, he is satisfied; and what they doe [...] beyond these commanded duties, hee receiues as a gracious and spontaneous gift.

This Diuine [...] is noted by Saint Chrysostome (Homil. 21. in priorem ad Cor,) and excellently de­clared in these words, Etenim cum benignus sit Domi­nus E suis praeceptis multum [...], potuisset enim si hoc voluisset praeceptum magis in­tendere & augere & dicere: Qui non perpetuo ie­iunat puniatur, qui non exercet virginitatem det pae­nas, [Page 522] [...] A [...] words are these onely: [...]. Verum [...] non [...], [...], si [...] indulgere. supplicium, Sednon [...] fecit concedens nobis vt [...] solum ex iussu sed [...] ex libero faciamus arbitrio.

ANSWER.

God in his bountie and [...] mercie, is pleased to accept of his children, true and entire obedience, although the same be lesse in measure and quantitie than his law re­quireth, B and lesse also than his seruants (if they vsed their vt­termost indeauour and force) might performe. S. Chrysostome vpon 1. Cor. Hom. 21. affirmeth, That God might haue impo­sed vpon man a stricter law, to wit, of perpetuall fasting, [...], [...], &c. But now, [...], &c. He hath [...] his precepts with mansuetude, [...], that we might doe many things not onely by precept, but also of our owne accord.

Now from hence you cannot conclude the Romish doctrine C of Workes of [...]; for [...] the definition, and being of workes of Supererogation, two things are required. First, That all be performed and fulfilled which the diuine Lawe commandeth. Secondly, Besides this, that some thing be per­formed which the diuine Law requireth not, either expressely or [...]. But if [...] men haue any sinne, they performe not all which the [...] Law requireth, for euerie sinne is a [...] of the [...] Law, 1. [...]. 3.4. And although God almightie doth not [...] (oras simply necessarie to D [...]) exact of his [...] and seruants, That in euery par­ticular worke of his seruice, they do the vttermost of their for­ces, but accepteth a possible measure and latitude of true and [...], August. d. Fid. & Oper. cap. 7. & 14. & contra Iulian. lib. 4. cap. 3. &c. 2. Epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 5. & d. perf. Iust. Resp. ad Rat. 16., consisting of Faith and Charitie, Gal. 5.6. yet this [...] not the highest degree of obedience a thing adiaphorous, and of right not due, but serueth, both to declare the riches of Gods mercie, in pardoning our offences, and also to humble vs before him in the recognition of our vn­worthinesse. S. Bernard [...]. serm. 2. Vigil. Natiu. Proptereà manda­ta sua mandauit custodire [...], vt videntes imperfectionem nostram deficere, & non posse impleri quòd debet, fugiamus ad [...] est [...] super [...], & qui non possumus in vestitu Innocentiae seu [...], apareamus vestiti confessione. hath these words: He hath therefore [...] his [...] to be obserued [...], or to the full, that E we [...], and falling short, and finding that we [Page 523] [...] to [...] that which we [...], may [...] to his mercie, and A say, Thy [...] is better [...] life: and because we are not able to ap­peare in the [...] of [...] and [...], we may appeare in the vesture of Confession.

IESVIT.

Wherefore the Precept, Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soule, with all thy strength, doth not commaund an intire imploy­ment B of all our powers on God, with all our vttermost forces; nor that we neuer loue, nor desire, nor thinke of any thing besides him; nor that all our thoughts and affections be wholly, intirely, and perpetually on him: For this were a thing impossible, and God doth not require of vs things vnpossible, as Scriptures and Fathers teach. This Precept therefore commaunds a quadruple integritie of diuine loue.

The first Integritie is in respect of our selues, that we C loue God wholly and intirely, not onely with the outside, but with the inside, euen to the bottome of our soule, that is in a word, sinceerely.

The second Jntegritie is in respect of God, that we loue God according to all his Commandements, not leauing any unkept; and so to loue God intirely, or with all the heart, is the same as to walke in all his Commaundents.

The third Jntegritie, is in regard of the effect of Loue, D which is to ioine men in friendship with God, whom wee must so loue, that there be no breach betweene God and vs, nor we seperated from him; which we do so long as we keepe his Commaundements without [...] mortally against them.

The fourth Jntegritie is, in respect of time, that we loue him intirely, not only for this present life, but also desiring and hoping to see and loue him for eternitie. E

ANSWER.

We maintaine not that the Precept Math. 22.37. Luc. 10.27. obligeth man at all times to an actuall imploiment of all [Page 524] his powers & the forces therof on God, without conuersion to A other lawfull obiects Aquin. 22. q. 44. ar. 4. ad. 2. Du­plicitèr contingit ex toto corde Deum deligere, vno quidem modo in actu, id est, vt totum cor hominis semper actualitèr in Deum feratur, & ista est perfectio patriae: Alio modo, vt habitualitèr totum cor hominis in Deum fera­tum, &c.: But we [...] with S. Augustine Aug. d. Doctr. Christi, lib. 1. cap. 22. Haec regula dilectionis constituta est, Diliges inquit proximum tuum sicut teipsum: Deum vero ex toto corde, & ex tota mente, vt omnes cogitationes tuas, & [...] vitam & intellectum in illum conferas, à quo habes ea ipsa quae confers. Cùm autem ait toto corde, tota anima, tota mente, nullam, vitae nostrae [...], quae recare debiat, & quasi locum dare vt alia re velit frui, sed quicquid aliud [...] venerit in animum, illuc rapiatur quo totius dilectionis impetus currit. Nullum extrà se riuulum duci patiatur, cuius deriuatione minuatur. [...]. lib. d. Praef. lust. Resp. ad Rat. 16. Cùm est adhuc aliquid carnalis concupiscentiae, quod vel continendo frenetur, non omnimodo ex tota anima deligitur Deus. [...]. in Cant. Serm. 20. Greg. sup. Reg. lib. 3. cap. 1. Bernard. B in Cant. Serm. 50. In affectu quis ità se habet vt mandatur., and other of the Fathers, three things concerning this Precept.

First, That it commaundeth to esteeme, desire, delight in, and to honour God almightie aboue all things created, and to sub­iect all our faculties, and the forces and operations of the same, to his obedience and seruice.

Secondly, That we ought not to entertaine any cogitation, or inordinate motion in our hearts, repugnant to his Law, or to commit any thing contrarie to his Commaundement.

Thirdly, That this Precept obligeth all people to the obe­dience thereof in this life, for it is the first and greatest morall C Precept, Math. 22.38. And Christ our Sauiour came not to de­stroy, but to continue and ratifie the Morall law, Math. 5.17.

Secondly, Whereas the Iesuit saith, God doth not require of vs things impossible. I answer, That if he speake of actions and duties simply necessarie to saluation, God (as looking on vs in Christ, and through the glasse of Euangelicall mercie) re­quireth not of his children things vnpossible Rom. 6. 17. Heb. 11. 33. Gen. 6. 9. Luc. 1. 67. Concil. Arausic. cap. 25. Hocetiàm secundum fidem Catholicam credimus, quod accepta per baptismum gratiae omnes baptisati, Christo [...] & coope­rante, quae ad salutem pertinent, possint ac debeant (si fidelitèr laborare voluerint) adimplere. Hieron. Ex­pos. Fid. Cath. & ad. Celant. Epist. 14. Aug. d. Natura & Grat. ca. 68.. But if his mea­ning be either of vnregenerate persons, while they are in that state, or of things vertuous and holy, according to their highest perfection, then both Scriptures and Fathers are against him D Rom. 7.18. Phil. 3.12. [...]. Ioh. 1. 9. Chrys. d. Paenit. Serm. 8. Hieron. c. Pelag. lib. 2. pag. 130. & sup. Ierem cap. 17. Aug. d. Grat. & lib. Arb. ca. 16. & d. pecc. mer. & remiss. li. 2. cap. 16. Bernard. Serm. 2. vigil. Notal. Dom. & in Cant. Serm. 50. Ergò man­dando impossibilia, &c..

IESVIT.

And in this sence S. Augustine, S. Bernard, and other Fathers are to be vnderstood, that say in the Precept, Di­liges E Aug. d. Spiritu & Litera, ca. vlt. Bernard. Serm. 50. in Cantica. Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, is contained the perfection of the life to come, and a perfection impossible to be attained to in this life, to wit, it is contained in the Pre­cept, [Page 525] not as perfection commaunded to be practised in this A life, but as a perfection to be desired and hoped for in the next: so that he that loues God sinceerely from the bottome of his heart, to the keeping of all his Commandements per­fectly, without breach of friendship betweene him and God, hauing his desires and loues referred with hope vnto Eter­nitie; without question, hee loueth God with all his heart, soule, and strength.

ANSWER. B

First, If the Precept, Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thine heart, &c. bind men no further than to an vnfained or sin­ceere loue of God, and the obseruing of his Commaunde­ments without breach of friendship, then it bindeth them not to the shunning of veniall sinnes. But according to S. Augustine Aug. d. Spir. & Lit. ca. 36. Verū etiàm in istis leui­oribus, &c., and S. Bernard Bernard. in Cant. Serm. 50., it bindeth man to the auoiding of all sinne, both veniall and mortall.

Secondly, These Fathers August. ibid. Sed ideò nobis hoc etiàm nunc praeceptum est. Idem. Epist. 200. Bernard. Ibidem. Nec laterit prae­ceptorem praecep­ti pondus, homi­num excedere vires, &c. Ergò mandando impossibilia, non praeuaricatores homines constituit, sed humi­les, &c. Accipientes quippè mandatum, & sentientes defectum, clamabimus in. [...], & miserabitur [...] Deus, & sciemus in illa die, quià non ex [...] quae [...], sed secundum suam misericordiam, saluos nos fecit. teach expressely, that the Com­maundement, C Math. 22. 37. bindeth men in this life, as a meanes to humble them, and to prouoke them to sue for Gods mercie. And if the Aduersarie replie, That these Fathers say it is a Precept indicatiue, or significatiue, what is [...] to be done, but not obligant Stapleton. d. [...]. lib. 6. ca. 10. pa. 190. [...]. d. Monach. li. 2. ca. 13..

I answer, First, it is the first and greatest Commandement of D the Morall law, Math. 22.38. but the Morall law, and all the Precepts thereof are perpetually obligant.

Secondly, If it bind not, then no temporall paine can suc­ceed the breach thereof Vasques. d. pae­nit. disp 94. ar. 1. du. 2. n. 3. Deus [...] punit, qui iàm dignus non est poena: Ergò dicendum est illum manere dignum ex se etiàm post iu­stificationem.; but iust persons which obserue other Commaundements, vndergoe temporall paine, Heb. 11. 36.37.

Thirdly, S. Augustine affirmeth Aug. Ep. 29. Quamdiucharitas augeri potest, profecto illud quod minus est quā debet, ex vitio est: ex quo vitio non est iustus in terra, qui E [...] & non peccet propter quod vitium, si dixcrimus quod peccatū non babemus, mendaces sumus, &c. [...] quod etiàm [...] necessariū est nobis dicere, dimitte nobis debita nostra, cum [...] omnia dicta, facta, cogitata, dimissa [...]. Id. d. verb. [...]. Ser. 2. Id. Ep. 26. ad. Hieron. Propter [...] imperfectionis vitiū si dixenmus [...] non habemus, nos ipsos fallimus, & veritas in nobis non est, [...] profecerimus necessarium est nobis dicere, dimitte nobis debita nostra, cū [...] omnia in Baptismo dimissa sunt: ex quo vitio non [...] in conspectu [...] omnis viuens., That it is sinne in man to [Page 526] [...] a lesse degree of Charitie than this law requireth: and A that therefore iust persons haue need to pray perpetually, For­giue vs our Trespasses. But if it were indicatiue, or directiue only, and not obligatorie, this were not true.

IESVITS §. 3. The Fathers taught Workes of Superero­gation, and prooued them by Scripture. B

BVt they that loue God so perfectly, as they loue not one­ly his Commandements, but also his Councells; not onely shunne such sinnes as separate from God, but also such as binder the perpetuall actuall loue of God. These bee they that doe more than they are commanded, that is, doe workes of Supererogation. And if your Maiestie call to minde vp­on how manifold graces this Merit is grounded, you will not, J hope, condemne the same of arrogance, but rather C [...] it, as being taught by holy Fathers, euen in expresse tearmes of Supererogation. Jn proofe whereof, J alleadge these few Testimonies.

ANSVVER.

THey which doe more than God hath commanded by his Law, as simply necessarle to saluation, to wit, they which giue all their goods to the poore, &c. exceed not heerein D the highest and strictest measure of Charitie, and obedience in this life; for the Euangelicall Law, commandeth vs to be per­fect, as our heauenly Father is perfect, Math. 5.48. by approa­ching as neere towards this Patterne as our humane frailtie will permit, and to loue, as Christ loued vs, Luk. 6.35. Rom. 5.7, 8. And there is a threefold kind of Obligation to God: First, of strict and expresse Law, common to all persons. Secondly, of particular Precept by extraordinarie Reuelation, Gen. 22. 2. Thirdly, of Gratitude, whereby (according to Saint Bernard Bern. Serm. d. Quadrupl. debito. Cum ei donauero, quicquid sum, quicquid possum, nonneistud est si­cut stella adsolem, gutta ad fluuium, lapis ad montem, granum ad acer­uum.) we are indebted, and owe to the Almightie. Omne quod sumus, E & omne quod possumus, Whatsoeuer we are, and whatsoeuer we are able to doe: Etsi cognouisses tu quam multa, & quam multis, debeas, videres, quam nihil sit quod facis; If man did consider how much hee oweth, and to how many, and by how many Titles, he would perceiue, all that hee doth (or can doe) to be [Page 527] [...] And when A [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...].

Touching the distinction of Precepts, and Councels BE. Moreton Appeal. lib. 5. c. 4. Sect. 3. n. 11. Not but that wee allow the distinction of Precept, and Coun­sell. M. Hooker, Ec­cles. Policie, lib. 2. n. 8. p. 122. BB. An­drewes, c. Apol. Bellar. ca. 8. p. 196. Muscul. in 1. Cor. 7. Hiperius, in 1. Cor. 7.25. [...]. ibid., I answere, That if according to the Tenet of Fathers August. Enchi­rid. ca. 121. Greg. Nazianz contr. Iu­lian. Orat. 1. Chrys. in Math. Hom. 2. & in Rom. Hom. 14. & in 1. Cor. Hom. 22., wee B vnderstand by Councels, Free-will Offerings, or Spontaneous Actions, exceeding that which the ordinarie Bond of necessa­rie dutie obligeth men vnto, and which are acceptable vnto God, in respect of their end; the Doctrine of Councels proo­ueth not workes of Supererogation, according to the Romish Tenet. For as I haue formerly declared, Supererogation im­plyeth these things: first, a perfect and exact performance of all commanded duties, without omission of any; secondly, a free and voluntarie exceeding and transcending all obedience C and seruice, enioyned by Diuine Precept. But supposing the perfection of the Diuine Law Aug. in Psalm. 140. Cū in Scrip­turis sanctis con­templatus fueris normam iustitiae, quantūcunq, pro­feceris [...] te peccatorem., and presupposing all men to be sinners in part, the former is vnpossible. And if our Ad­uersaries will be so gracelesse, as to make any man in this life (except the Holyest of Holyes, 1. Pet. 2.22.) free from sinne August. sup. Psal. 137. timeo ne cum inspexeris, inuenies plura peccata, quam merita. Idem, d. Cinit. Dei, lib 14. cap. 9. Sine [...] qui viuere se existimat, non id agit vt peccatum non habeat, sed vt veniam non accipiat. Concil. [...]. ca. 6. & 7., the Apostle enrolleth them in the blacke Booke of Damnable Lyers, 1. Ioh. 1. 10. and they may borrow a Ladder with Ace­sius Constantin. apud Socrat. Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 7. [...]. Cyprian d. Oper. & Eleemos. n. 3. Quisquis se inculpatum dixerit, aut superbus, aut stultus est., the Nouatian Heretike, and so climbe alone vp to Hea­uen, or indeed rather fall with a breake-necke, downe to Hell, Matth. 9. 13. For who are more desperately sicke, Quàm qui D mentem febribus perdiderunt, than they, which by the Feauer of Pride haue lost the vnderstanding of their owne sinfull Con­dition.

IESVIT.

Haymo, a learned Expositor of Scripture, liuing in the E [...] in Euang. Dom. 14. post [...]. yeere 800, thus writeth, Supererogat Stabularius, quando hoc agit Doctor ex voto, quod non accepit ex Praecepto, quod secit Paulus Apostolus, quando [Page 528] [...] A [...] [...], in cap. [...]. Luc. [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...]

ANSWER. B

You cannot produce one Father, or antient Doctor, which maintaineth workes of Supererogation, to your purpose.

Haimo and venerable Bede affirme, That some men doe that by Vow, or voluntarie choyse (to wit, in some particular Acti­ons) which they are not obliged vnto by strict Precept; and that at the day of Iudgement, they themselues (not Soules in Purgatorie) shall reape the benefit hereof (to wit, an accessorie augmentation of Blisse:) But from a partiall Supererogation, to a C totall and generall, it followeth not. For if a man, which is ob­liged to worke eight houres euerie day, by the space of a moneth, and that according to a certaine perfection of worke­manship, should for two or three daies worke tenne houres, and exceed the manner of workemanship enioyned him, and then againe faile other twentie whole dayes, both in time and man­ner; it might be said of this man, That hee did exceed, or doe more worke for three dayes, than was commanded; and yet comparing and conioyning the whole time, and workmanship, D hee hath done lesse than was enioyned him. So likewise, a de­uout person being commanded by the Morall Law to obserue all the Commandements, great and small, during his naturall life; if he should in some Actions, or circumstances thereof, per­forme more than is strictly required (vpon necessitie to Saluati­on, or by his generall Calling) and yet be deficient in many du­ties enioyned; this man might be said to supererogate in that, wherein he exceeded the Rule: but (because in other passages of his manners, hee was a sinner, Ambros. Apol. Dauid. ca. 2. Vnus­quisque nostrum per singulas ho­ras, quam multa delinquit? [...]. [...] Serm. 7. Quis [...] ita immunis à culpa, vt in co non [...], vel. [...] quod arguat, vel [...] quod remittat. Basil. li. d. Poenit. Non Angeli sumus, sed homines, et cadimus & resurgimus, idque saepius cadem hora. August. in Psalm. 137. Timeo ne cum [...], [...] pec­cata quam merita. Chrysost. in Galath. ca. 6. sicut aurum, &c. Iam. 3.2.) it cannot be truly said, that he hath workes of Supererogation, to be layd vp in a E common Treasurie, for the benefit of other people.

IESVIT. A

S. Gregorie the Great, in the yeere 590. alluding to this Greg. 1. 26. Mor. c. 20. tearme of Supererogating, more than is receiued, saith: Multi Virginitatis virtute pollent, vt videlicet plus impendant obsequio quam acceperunt praecepto. S. Fulgentius in the yeere 500. Quid est si quid super­erogaueris, Fulgent. Prolog. in lib. contra Moni­mum. nisi si quid à me magis acceperis? Nam & ipse qui supererogabat, in eo quod non acceperat B praeceptum, sed dabat ex charitate Concilium, mise­ricordiam Paulin. Ep. 2. ad Seuerum. se profitetur vtique consecutum. S. Pau­linus in the yeere 400. Hic Samarites Christus red di­turus est Beatae Virginitati de innumeris huius boni fructibus, vberes gratias, & immortales Coronas, quia hoc Concilium Praecepto adjiciens, de suo su­pererogauit. S. Augustine in the same Age, In illis August. lib. 2. 4. E­uang. c. 30. (Praeceptis) Dominicis imperat vobis in hijs (Conci­lijs) C si quid amplius supererogaueritis, in redeundo reddet vobis. And againe, Stabularius autem Aposto­lus Idem, ibid. cap. 19. est, duo Denarij duo Praecepta Charitatis, quam per Spiritum secum acceperant Apostoli, ad Euange­lizandum caeteris: Quod supererogat autem illud est quod ait. De Virginibus autem Praeceptum [...] non habeo, Concilium autem do. And in ano­ther August. d. Adulte­rin. Coniug. lib. 1. cap. 14. Booke, Quae licita sunt, nec vllo Praecepto Domi­ni prohibentur, sed sicut expedit potius tractanda D sunt, non praescripto Legis, sed Concilio charitatis: Haec sunt quae amplius supererogantur, saucio qui curandus ad stabulum Samaritani miseratione per­ductus est. Optatus Mileuitanus, in the yeere 370. Optat. li. 6. c. Par­men. Sed qui saucium commen dauerat, se promiserat red­diturum quicquid in curam amplius erogasset post impensos duos Denarios, non Praecepta sed Conci­lium erogat Paulus. Nec impedimentum est volun­tati, E nec nolentes impellit aut cogit. Qui dederit (in­quit) Virginem suam bene facit, & qui non dederit melius facit. Haec sunt verba Concilij: nec sunt vlla [Page 530] Praecepta coniuncta. S. Hierome, Plus amat Christus A Hieron. aduers. Io­uin. ca. 7. li. 1. Virgines, quia sponte tribuunt quod sibi non fuerat impetratum, maiorisque gratiae est offerre quod non debeas, quam reddere quod exigaris. S. Chrysostome; Chrysoft. Hom. 8. d. Poenit. Nequaquam Dominum incuses haud mandat impos­sibilia, multi rpsa superant mandata. S. Gregorie Na­zianzen; Greg. Nazianzen. Orat. 3. In legibus noftris alia parendi necessitatem imponunt, nec sine periculo praetermitti possunt, alia non necessitate constringunt, sed in arbitrio & vo­luntate B posita sunt, ac proinde hanc rationem habent, vt qui ea custodierint praemijs & honore afficiantur, qui autem minus ea expleuerint, nihil periculi per timescant. S. Cyprian; Non iubet virginitatem Domi­nus Cyprian. de habitu Virginum, prope finem. sed Hortatur, nec iugum necessitatis imponit quando maneat voluntatis arbitrium liberum. Ori­gen, Origen. in ca. 15. ad Rom. Ea quae supra debitum facimus, non facimus ex Praecepto, verbi causa, Virginitas non ex debito solui­tur, C sed supra debitum offertur.

I will not bring more proofe of this Doctrine out of Scripture, which the Fathers I cited, prooued by the words 1. Cor. 7. 25. of S. Paul, in expresse tearmes, affirming, That there are besides Precepts, workes of Supererogation, or Counsailes, De Virginibus Praeceptum Domini non habeo, sed Consilium do. Nor will I alledge more Testimonies of Fathers, which might be produced in great number, most D plaine and pregnant. Onely I cannot omit one place of S. Ambrose, who deliuering this Doctrine, doth together Ambros. d. viduis vltra medium. answer a Protestants vulgar Obiection against it. Itaque qui Praeceptum impleuerint, possunt dicere serui in­utiles sumus, quod debuimus facere fecimus. Hoc Virgo non dicit, non dicit qui bona sua vendidit, sed Luc. 17. vers. 10. quasi repofita expectat praemia, sicut sanctus Aposto­lus ait: Ecce nos reliquimus omnia, & secuti sumus Matth. 19. vers. 17. te, quid ergo erit nobis? Sunt enim Spadones quise E Ibid. vers. 12. castrauerunt propter regnum coelorum, sed hoc non omnibus imperatur, sed ab omnibus flaguatur, Virgo prouocatur [...], non vinculis alligatur, sed nec [Page 531] vidua Praeceptum accipit, sed Consilium. What can be A more cleerly spoken for works of Supererogation, or Councels?

ANSVVER.

If you had examined the place of Gregorie Greg. Mor. li. 26. ca. 21. Aliud est quod per Sa­cram Scripturam omnibus genera­liter precipitur, a­liud quod specia­liter perfectioribus Imperatur., you might haue perceiued, that he diuideth Diuine Precepts, into generall or common Precepts, and into personall and speciall: and the words which you alleadge (paring off the rest, because they make a­gainst you) wherein he saith, That they which are not iudged and raigne (Math. 19.27, 28.) doe transcend the Precepts of the Law, by the perfection of their vertues, &c. are vnderstood by him of ge­nerall B and common Precepts, which oblige all people, and not Plus exhibere ap­petunt, quam pre­ceptis generalibus audire potuerunt. of speciall Commandements: but where a man is obliged by any Commandement, generall or speciall, there is no Super­erogation. And that Saint Gregorie was farre from maintaining workes of Supererogation, appeareth by his perpetuall and constant Doctrine, concerning the defect and imperfection of mans righteousnesse Greg. Mor. lib. 5. cap. 7.8. & lib. 8. cap. 13. 20. 21. 23. & lib. 9. cap. 14.27.28. Quantumlibet rectis operibus insudemus, veram munditiam nunquam apprehen­dimus, sed imitamur. Et lib. 24. cap. 18. & lib. 29. cap. 9. & lib. 32. cap. 1. & lib. 35. cap. 3.26. & sup. Ezech. C hom. 9. & Prolog. in Psal. poenitential., and his renouncing all confidence in his owne worthinesse and deserts Idem. in 1. Psal. poen. Non de meis meritis confidens, vt me sal­uum facias supplico, sed de sola misericordia tua presumens impetrare, quod non de meis meritis spero..

The rest of the Fathers, to wit, Fulgentius, Paulinus, S t. Au­gustine, Optatus, S t. Hierom, S t. Chrysostome, Gregorie Nazianzen, S t. Cyprian, Origen, and S t. Ambrose, mention workes of Coun­sell, and one of them saith, It is possible to doe more than is commanded. But this Father speaketh not thus, in respect of all the Commandements of God, for then hee must free iust persons from all sinne; but in respect of some particular Acti­ons, D to wit, whereas the Law of Charitie commandeth to di­stribute a portion of goods to the poore, a man may bestow halfe his goods; neuerthelesse, he which performeth this, may be deficient another way, for he may fall short in the intension of his Charitie, and also in the measure of his Hope, Humilitie, and other vertues.

The Iesuit concludeth the place of Saint Ambrose, Lib. de viduis, with an Exclamation, saying, What can bee more clearely spoken for Workes of Counsell and Supererogation? But before his boasting, he should haue aduised better touching these Fathers meaning. First, Ambrose teacheth, that there is a difference E betweene Precepts and Counsells. Secondly, That the obser­uing Duplex forma mandati, vna prae­ceptiua, alia vo­luntaria. Hoc non omnibus Impera­tur. of Counsells is not required of all, but of some. Thirdly, They which besides Precepts, obserue Counsells, are more profitable seruants, and shall receiue a greater reward.

[Page 532] Now the Argument for Workes of Supererogation, from A this Testimonie of S t. Ambrose, must be as followeth.

If they are more profitable seruants, and receiue a greater reward, which performe some vertuous and laudable Actions, not inioyned by common Precept, but by Councell; then Workes of Supererogation must be granted.

But they are more profitable seruants, and receiue a greater re­ward, which performe some vertuous Actions, not inioyned by common Precept, but by Councell, Ergo,

Workes of Supererogation must be granted.

I answere, denying the Consequence: for to the being and B definition of Workes of Supererogation, more is required than the performing of some vertuous and rewardable Actions, inioyned by Councell, and not by common Precept, to wit, First, That the said vertuous and laudable Actions, bee neither inioyned by strict and morall Precept, nor yet by the Law of gratitude; for when the Fathers oppose Precepts and Councels, they vnderstand Precepts strictly, and not the Law of Grati­tude. Secondly, They which supererogate, must doe the same vniuersally, and transcend the common rule in euery Precept C and vertuous Action, and not in some alone. Thirdly, They must so transcend, that they be guiltie of no Omission or Com­mission, either against the substance or perfection of any mo­rall Commandement.

IESVIT.

Neither is there any arrogancie, as J said before, in this Doctrine: for neither the Fathers nor wee attribute more vnto man than Protestants doe; but onely acknow­ledge D one kinde of Diuine liberalitie towards man, which Protestants bee somewhat backward to beleeue: for Pro­testants will not denie, supposing that God exacteth much lesse than man is able (by his grace) to performe, but a man may offer vnto God some voluntarie seruices, beyond com­manded duties. Catholickes also grant, that had God vsed the vttermost seueritie in charging vs with debts, as hee E might hane done, we could neuer by any measure of grace that now is ordinarily affoorded vnto men, haue complied with vnrequired offices. The difference therefore betweene them and vs, is this: They thinke that God seuerely exacteth [Page 533] of man, that euer, and in all [...], hee worke accor­ding A to the vttermost of his power; yea, commands him things impossible for him to performe. Contrarywise, wee [...], that God (to the end his Law may bee vnto men, A sweet yoke, A light loade, and his Commandements not dif­ficile) doth not exact of man all that man is able to doe with his grace, but much lesse, and so much lesse, as man is able through his remission, to offer him liberalities: What pride is it for man to acknowledge this sweet prouidence of this B Creatour, to praise his mercifull indulgence, in not exacting so much as he might? Especially beleeuing, that this diuine indulgence, not to exact of man, and consequently mans a­bilitie, to present vnto God more perfect and excellent seruice than he requires, is giuen him through the merits of Christ Iesus.

ANSWER. C

First, You couple your selues with Fathers, like as the Pha­rises did themselues with Abraham; Sed quid Simiae prodest, si vi­deatur esse Leo, saith Gregorie Nazianzen, An Ape is but an Ape, Greg. Naz. in Sent. although he will seeme a Lyon.

Secondly, A man may offer vnto God a free-will offering, and yet herein he performeth no more than he is obliged vn­to by the Law of gratitude.

Thirdly, It is no part of our Creed, that God in the Euan­gelicall Couenant seuerely exacteth of man any thing, as ne­cessarie D to his saluation, which is impossible for him to per­forme by the assistance of diuine grace P. Martir. sup. Rom. 8. Si quis recte intelligat no­stram assertionem, facile videbit, nos non docere man­data Dei prorsus esse impossibilia, nisi tantum quod ad eos [...], qui à Christo sunt alieni, pa. 457., and yet wee say a­gaine, That God by the rule of his Law commandeth a grea­ter perfection of righteousnesse than man is able to performe in this life August. d. pecc. mer. & remiss. lib. 2. cap. 16. Iubet Deus, omnibus hominibus vt E non faciant vllum peccatum, quamuis sit prescius neminem hoc impleturum: vt quicunque impie & dam­nabiliter eius precepta contempserint, ipse faciat in [...] damnatione quod iustum est: Quicunque au­tem in eius preceptis obedienter & pie proficientes, nec tamen omnia quae precepit implentes, sicuti si­bi dimitti volunt, si alijs [...] dimiserint, ipse faciat in eorum mundatione quod bonum est., that all flesh may be humbled by the sight of in­firmitie, and consider the gracious indulgence of God, in remit­ting sinne, and his free bountie, in conferring so great and so many vndeserued benefits.

Fourthly, We praise God as much as any Romists can doe, for his mercifull indulgence, in remitting, and not exacting so [Page 534] [...] but with all we beleeue A that God hath not [...] his [...], [...] vs from be­ing stil his debtors, and we stand perpetually obliged vnto him, touching the debt of Obedience, yea more after Grace recei­ned than before, Rom. 6. 18. And although he imputeth not [...] defects, when we obey him in the maine, yet this indulgence [...] power to man to merit his owne saluation, much lesse to supererogate, or to communicate his vertuous actions by way of satisfaction, vnto others.

IESVIT. §. 4. B Workes with reference to the Trea­sure of the Church.

THe other part of this Controuersie proposed by your Maiestie, about Workes referred vnto the Treasure of the Church, concernes good Workes, not as they are meritorious of reward, but as they are satisfactorie for sinne: for the workes of Saints, as they are Me­rits, C be laied vp not in the Treasurie of the Church, to bee applied vnto others, but in the memorie of God, to receiue their deserued guerdon in due time.

ANSWER.

TO the constitution of Popes Pardons, three things are re­quired by the Papals, and reiected by vs. First, Superflu­ous and redundant satisfactions of Saints Nugnus. Ad­dit. in. 3. pa. Tho. q. 25. ar. 1. dif. 2. Fides est ità vt [...] sit haere­sis [...], esse thesaurum In Ec­clesia, constans ex satisfactiomb su­perabundantibus Christi Domini, & fides est ità vt oppofitum sit er­roneum, hunc the­saurum etiam cō ­stare ex satisfactionibus Sanctorum.. Secondly, A vast Treasurie in the Church militant, to receiue and con­taine D the same Id. Ibid. Thesaurum dici metaphoricè, &c. ad Sgnificandum E cumulum & [...] meritorum Christi & Sanctorum, in quantum constat ex satisfactionibus Christi & Sanctorum, quae bona modo in terris non habent Dominum, quià nulli sunt applicata in particulari.. Thirdly, An eminent authoritie and power in the Popes Antonin. sum. Mor. p. 1. tit. 10. cap. 1. Claues istius thesauri, ad ipsum erogandum [...] habet Papa. and Prelates of the Roman Church, to commu­nicate and applie the same to the liuing and defunct Ibid. Possunt autem valere indulgentiae, secundum Thomam & Richardum in 4. nen solum viuis, sed etiàm existentibus in purgatorio.. Prote­stants denie that any member of this Doctrine is Catholicke and Orthodoxall; or that the holy Apostles, or Primitiue Church maintained the same, by teaching, or practise. We af­firme also, That the said Doctrine is nouell, and deuised by Ro­man Prelates for filthie lucre [...]. [...] in 3. Tho. q. 25. [...]. 1. dif. 1. [...] mihi vide­tur melius esse ex genere secundum se, illas (pecunias) conferre ad lucrandas indulgentias, &c. pa. 447..

[Page 535] The Aduersarie notwithstanding, laboureth to vnderprop A the tottering wall of Papall [...] and Indulgences, First, by distinction of Merits and Satisfactions; Secondly, by explica­tion of his Romish Tenet, touching Satisfactions; Thirdly, by deliuering the maine grounds of the Doctrine of Satisfa­ctions, and Pardons.

His first Proposition is, The merits of Saints are reserued and laid vp in the memorie of God, and not in the Treasurie of the Church [...]. sum. lib. 4. d. Relax. per Claues. Ecclesia non solum mere­tur remissionē cul­pae alicui, sed etiā remissionē poenae.. And on the contrarie, the redundant satisfacti­ons of Saints are laid vp in the Treasurie of the Church.

But this assertion is voluntarie, deliuered onely, and not B prooued. And if Saints haue superabundant Satisfactions, then they haue also superabundant Merits [...]. An­nal. tom. 14. anno 1300. n. 4. Dictorū [...] (Pe­tri & Pauli) meri­tis, omnes animae in purgatorio, non [...] à poenis fu­issent liberatae, sed aeternam quoquè gloriā consecutae., as appeareth in Christ, who is their samplar: and if their Satisfactions are communi­cable, why shall not their merits be communicated to other persons Zerula. d. In­dulg li. 1. ca. 18. q. 6. An viuus satis­faciat, vel impe­tret, vel meretur per viam iustitiae, &c. Resp. Dico se­cundò quod etiam per viam iustitiae 2. Tim. 4. Et sicut viuus pro viuo potest mereri & satisfacere per viam iustitiae, sic etiàm pro defunctis, &c.? and if this, why may not the Church applie and communicate the one as well as the other? Poperie is a myste­rie, Apoc. 17.5. And the Canonists say of the Pope, Stat pro ratione voluntas Vid. Iacob. d. Graph. Decis. Aur. p. 1. li. 1. ca. 31. nu. 3., his absolute will stands for a reason: Et po­test aliquid de nihilo facere, he is able to make something of no­thing: otherwise, there is the same reason for communication C of Merits, and for Satisfactions; for in Christ Iesus both were communicated alike, & Christ is the Samplar, or Archtype, ac­cording to which, the Doctrine of saintly Merit and Satisfa­faction (if there were in truth any such) must be proportioned.

IESVIT.

The Doctrine of Satisfaction, is like the former of Me­rit, D much spoken against, and by many, disliked in the high­est degree; who yet perchance doe not much vnderstand what they so earnestly impugne, as may appeare by this briefe declarion of our Doctrine in this point.

ANSWER.

We grant the paritie of both Doctrines, in regard of fal­shood: and as there is no Merit of Condignitie, but in Christ E Iesus alone, so likewise of Satisfaction.

But whereas you say, that many dislike the same without vnderstanding, what they impugne: this insolent censure is fre­quent [Page 536] with you; yet we freely grant, that by mixing Theolo­gie, A and Sophistrie, you [...] laboured to make your new Do­ctrine [...] and [...] Cornel. [...]. sup. Rom. 6. pag. 279. Vigebat spi­nosa & molesta nescio quae Theo­logia, de instanti­bus, relationibus, de quidditatibus, de formalitatibus, itemquè baec om­nia Sillogismis ar­te contortis, & humanis duntaxtat argutijs, quae proculdubio, qua authoritate recipiuntur, refelli possunt B [...] tota [...] in hominum decretis, quae inter se pugnantia semper nullo tempore reconci­lianda, alunt perpetuam per secula litem, &c. Is sublimis Theologus habebatur, qui maiora por­tenta pro suis [...] effingere sciat, praetijque pars erat gloriolae inanis non intelligi, grandia il­la verba [...] alto [...] inter [...] de sacris Philosophantes trutinabant. Iurauerunt vniuersi in [...] verba. Hinc [...] sectae, Thomistae, Scotistae, Occhamistae, Albertistae, Egidiani, [...], posthabebantur Euangeliae, Epistolae, Christiana Sapientia delitescebat, a paucissimis trade­batur, sed frigidè, non dicam in sincerè. Ecce nunc in hoc seculo bonarum literarum [...] occasione ac­cepta ab impijssima hac Haereticorum secta, diuina gratia, emergit Christus, Moses, Paulus, Petrus, quot hominum pigritiam excussit Deus, quot spiritus suscitauit, vt occurrat lupis his, qui [...] Dominicae oues mactare venerunt, quot abdita Scripturarum loca, enucleauit labor eorum assiduus?, and you are oftentimes so ob­scure and vncertaine in this and many [...] points, that you vn­derstand not your selues. And of our selues we may affirme without arrogancie, that for ought you are able to demon­strate to the contrarie, God almightie, both by Nature, Art, and Grace, hath affoorded vs no lesse sufficient meanes to vn­derstand truth than your selues.

IESVIT.

First, we doe not thinke that any sinner can make sa­tisfaction C by workes vnto God, for the guilt of mortall and damnable sinne. The reason is, because workes of Sa­tisfaction are such as gaine pardon, and obtaine it by some kind of justice from God. The workes of his children may merit in this sort, as being the workes of them that are in­struments of the holy Ghost, dwelling and operating within them, and liuing members of Christ his mysticall body, re­ceiuing influence of life, and operation from him, as from D their head. Sinners are neither the children of God, nor the temples of the holy Ghost, nor liuing members of Christ: so their workes cannot be so gratious, as they may deserue any thing as due to them in any kind of justice from God, much lesse can they deserue so great a reward as remission of mortall sinne, and of the eternall punishment due there­unto,

ANSWER. E

As you thinke not the one, touching sinners, so you cannot prooue the other, concerning iustified persons; as appeareth by that which hath formerly beendeliuered in confutation of your errour.

IESVIT. A

Secondly, we doe not teach that any Saint or Angell can make satisfaction vnto God for the mortall sinne of any man, no not all Saints and Angels, putting together all their good Workes and Satisfactions. The reason is, because an iniurie is so much the greater, by how much the person that offers it is base, and the person to whom it is offered is noble, as the light of reason and the estimation of man­kind B sheweth. But God (whom man casts away and aban­doneth by sinne, and consequently wrongs) is of infinit dig­nitie, and man offending him, comparatiuely with him infi­nitly base: wherefore mortall sinne, which is an abando­ning of God for some transitorie content, is iniurie done vnto God incomparably grieuous. On the other side, Sa­tisfaction is the lesse esteemed, by how much the person sa­tisfying is meane, and the person offended great. Men and C Angells, what are they, being compared with God? certainely nothing; therefore certainely their Workes and Satisfactions are inestimably disproportionable to satisfie, for any the least mortall sinne, the guilt whereof is so great a debt, as is vnsatisfiable, but onely by the pretious bloud of the Sonne of God; hee, being a person coequall and consubstantiall with his Father, to satisfie Gods an­ger, by humbling the infinite dignitie of his person vnto D the most disgracefull death of the Crosse, offered satisfa­ction full and compleat, yea superabundant; the person satisfying, in regard of his diuinitie, being infinitely more honourable than the person offending was contemptible by reason of his basenesse.

Thirdly, the Roman Church teacheth, That those that haue beene made the children of God by Baptisme, if they sinne mortally afterward, when they repent, God forgiues E them the guilt of sinne, and consequently the eternall pu­nishment, by the sacrament of Penance, bountifully and graciously through the meere merits of Christ, without their satisfactions: onely they must by faith, by feare, by [Page 538] hope, by contrition, by purposes of amendment, prepare and A make themselues capable of that gratious and grace-infu­sing pardon.

ANSWER.

The Sonne of God alone is the propitiation for our sinnes, 1. Iohn 2.2. and the fault and guilt of sinne was purged by the same Oblation. By him, all that beleeue, are iustified or absol­ued, [...], from all, Act. 13. 39. Neither are there two distinct Sacrifices and Ransomes, to wit, the Blood of Christ, B for the redemption of crimes, and eternall paine; and the me­rits and supra-passions of Saints Extra. d. poen. & Remiss. Cle­mens 6. ca. Vni­genitus. Ad cuius quidem thesauri cumulū beatae Dei genitricis, omni­umque Electorum à primo iusto vsque ad vltimum merita, adminiculum praestare noscuntur, &c. [...]. 4. d. 20. q. 4. n. 10. In hoc conueniunt Sancti cum Christo, in his quae fuerunt Supererogationis, quod aliquid ponunt in the­sauro Ecclesiae sicut Christus. Al. Hal. 4. q. 23. ar. 2. n. 3. Capreol. 4. d. 20. q. 1. ar. 3. Aureol. 4. d. 20. pa. 148. Salmer. in Coloss. cap. 1. disp. 3. pa. 351. Panormit. 5. Decretal. d. poen. & Remiss. ca. Quod autem. n. 8. Scire C debes quod ex effusione sanguinis Christi, & multis meritis martyrum, & aliorum sanctorum, constituitur Thesaurus Ecclesiae, cuius potestatem habet Vicarius Christi, & claudit & aperit cui vult: nam minima gutta sanguinis Christi fuisset sufficiens, ad redimendum totum mundum. Item Martyres fuerunt hic puniti vltra quod eorum delicta meruerunt, vnde eorum merita manserunt in Ecclesia vniuersali, quia sicut nullum malum impunitum ita nullum bonum irremuneratum: Ille ergo qui concedit Indulgentias, inten­dit communicare illa bona irremunerata, compensatione quadam., together with Christ his sufferings for smaller sinnes, and for the temporall paine of mortall. But the Lambe of God bare all our sinnes in his Bo­die vpon the Tree, Iohn 1.29. 1. Pet. 2.24. and his Blood alone cleanseth from all sinne, 1. Iohn 1.9.

Smaller sinnes and offences, are a parcell of mans debt to God, and wee pray to God, in the Name, and for the Merits and satisfaction of his beloued Sonne, to forgiue vs our whole debt. Our Sauiour taught not his Church to pray to his Fa­ther, for a free remission of lesser sinnes Antonin. Sum. Moral. p. 1. Tit. 10. cap. 3. Palud. 4. d. 20. q. 4. n. 51. Po­test, vt videtur per indulgentiam, in quantum habetra­tionem cuiusdam absolutionis, remitti veniale quoad culpam. Viguer. Instit. cap. 16. §. 6. vers. 22. Plenissima (Indulgentia) quia non solum remittuntur poenae mortalium & venialium, sed etiam ipsa culpa venialis remittitur., for our owne satis­faction, D together with Christs; but binding vp all sinnes in one bundle, he teacheth vs to pray, [...]: Forgiue vs our debts (that is, all our debts, Psal. 103.3.) as we forgiue our debtours, Math. 6.12.

If therefore our Aduersaries teach no more concerning this than what is contained in this Section, to wit, that no Saint or Angell can make satisfaction to God for mortall sinne: This E Doctrine is true; but there is also a further truth, to wit, No Saint or Angell can make compensant satisfaction to God for the guilt of any sinne, great or small; but all such satisfaction (taking the word properly) was performed by the Sonne of [Page 539] God, who trode the Wine-presse alone; and of the people, A there was none with him, Esa. 63. 3. Ioh. 1.29. 1. Ioh. 2.2.

Secondly, It is a Veritie, That regenerate persons [...] sinne after Baptisme, are renewed by the vertue of Repen­tance Chrys. in Matth. Hom. 10. Non est aliquod omnino peccatū quod non cedat poenitentiae virtuti imo gratiae Dei, cum ad [...] ora conuertimur., Luc. 22. 62. But it is erroneous, that there are two distinct kinds of Repentance, one before, and the other after Baptisme; the one a Vertue onely, the other both a Sacrament and a Vertue. For where there is the same definition, there is also the same thing in kind. But Repentance before, and after Baptisme, hath the same definition, and integrall parts, to wit, B Contrition for sinnes committed, Confession to God, and (if need require) Confession to men (according to the qualitie of the fault,) Amendment of Life, and humble Supplication by Prayer of Faith, for reconciliation with God, and for remission of sinnes, Matth. 3.6. Luc. 3.10. Act. 3. 19. & cap. 8.22. & cap. 26.20. Also the Grace, and promise of Remission, is made to Repentance, before and after Baptisme, Act. 3. 19. & 5.31. & 8.22. Apoc. 2. 5. 16. And if Repentance before Baptisme, is no Sacrament, What causeth it to be such after Baptisme? For no visible Element, or signe is added, neyther is any pro­mise C of a different kind from the former, annexed. And al­though the Apostles, 1. Cor. 5.3. & 2. Cor. 2, 3. &c. & cap. 7.8. and also the Primitiue Church Tertull. lib d. Poenit. cap. 9 Cy­prian. d. Lapsis., vrged a stricter manner and degree of Humiliation vpon notorious Delinquents, after Bap­tisme, than before; yet this Discipline changed not the kind or substance of Repentance, but encreased onely the quantitie and measure thereof.

IESVIT.

Fourthly, the Romane Church holds, That God by Pe­nance D forgiuing the eternall punishment, doth in lieu there­of manie times appoint a Taske of temporall paine, to be endured by the Penitent. This reserued penaltie, is greater or lesser, according to the multitude and grieuousnesse of the sinnes committed, and is that for which Penitents may and must satisfie. And why may not the Penall Workes, performed by the children of God, beautified by so manyafore-named excellent Graces, be sufficient to deserue of God E the remission of this temporall Mulct, and cancell the Debt of enduring transitorie paine? I could bring Testi­monies of the most antient Fathers in great number, for [Page 540] the necessitie we haue of suffering these voluntarie afflic­tions A for sinnes, and of the efficacitie thereof to expiate sinne, with the verie name of Satisfaction; there being scarce anie antient Father, that hath not taught both the thing, and the word.

ANSWER.

When God pardons a sinner, he doth it not by way of Ex­change, or Parcelling, but remitteth all punishment of Maledi­ction, B or pure Reuenge Prosp. Sent. 5. Misericorditèr tē ­poralē adhibet se­ueritatem. Id. Sent. 231. Cum facit vt aliqua tribulatione vexemur, etiā tunc misericors est.: For that which is so forgiuen, as that after pardon it is not mentioned, or remembred, and which is cast behind Gods backe, and throwne into the bottome of the Sea, and which can no where be found, and is blotted out of the Debt-Booke of the Almightie, is not taken away by commutation of a greater punishment into a lesse, but by a free and full condonation of all vindictiue punishment. But the ho­ly Scripture, and the Primitiue Fathers, teach such a remission of sinnes on Gods part, to the Penitent, Ezech. 18.22. Esa. 38. 17. & ca. 43. 25. & 44. 22. Mich. 7.19. Ier. 50.20. Heb. 8. C 12. & 10. 17. Col. 2. 14. Matth. 18.32. S. Augustine Aug. sup. Psal. 31. Sitexit peccata Deus, noluit ad­uertere noluit ani­maduertere, si no­luit animaduerte­re, noluit punire, noluit agnoscere, maluit ignoscere., If God hath couered sinnes, hee will not obserue, hee will not thinke vpon them, to punish them; hee will not take knowledge, but rather pardon. Gregorie Greg. Mor. li. 4. ca. 18. the Great; Ignoscendo impunita relinquit, By pardo­ning, he leaueth them vnpunished. Cassiodorus Cassiodor. sup. Psal. 84.; Remittere est debitum relaxare, non causae alicuius interuentu sed pietatis intuitu, To remit, is to release the Debt; not by entercourse of any cause (on mans part) but by aspect of Pietie. Neuerthelesse, after great and enormious offences committed by his people, God doth chastise them August. sup. Psal. 50. Aliquan­do Deus cui ig­noscit in futuro se­culo, corripit eum de peccato in isto seculo. Nam & ipsi Dauid cui dictum iam fuerat per Prophetam, dimissum est peccatum tuum, euenerunt quidam quae minatus [...], Deus propter ipsum peccatum. Nam filius eius Absolon [...] eum cruen­tum Bellum gessit, & in multis humiliauit patrem suum. Ambulabat ille in dolore, in tribulatione humi­liationis suae: ita subditus Deo, vt omnia iusta ei tribuens, confiteretur, quod [...] pateretur indigne, habens iam rectum cor, cui non displicebat Deus. with the Rod of Correction, Psal. D 89. 33. 1. Cor. 11. 31, 32. And this Correction, is a paine of Castigation, Lament. Ierem. 3.39. but not a punishment of Malediction Vasq. 1. 2. Disp. 208. ca. 5. nu. 25. Si Deus vellet aliquem torquere, non [...] macula, nec [...], malum quod ei infligeret, non haberet rationem poenae. Nam poena est malum [...] propter [...], sed Deus tanquam Author [...], & mortis posset ipsum affligere, E sicut etiam fecit cum Sancto Iob. Bernard. in Cant. Serm. 16. Etsi quandoque feriat vt emendet, nun­quam tamen vt [...]., Galath. 3. 13. a worke of Gods Mercie, rather than of his Iustice.

The difference betweene Pontificians and vs in this Doctrine, is, That we beleeue a remainder of Temporall affliction, after [Page 541] remission of the guilt of sinne in this life onely, and that for A chastisement Aug. in Psa. 98. Illi Deus irascitur, quem peccantem non flagellat. Nam cui verè propicius est, non solum donat peccata ne [...] ad futurum seculum, sed etiam chastigat ne semper peccare delectet. Orig. sup. Genes. Hom. 16. Quod iustis exercitium virtutis est, hoc iniustis poena peccati est. August. Epist. 87. Quid non misericorditer. praestaretur hominibus à Deo, à quo etiam tribulatio beneficium est. Res prosperae, donum sunt consolantis: res aduersae, donum admonentis Dei. Idem, c. Faust. Manich. lib. 22. ca. 67. Reade the Margen, pa. 547. c. August. c. Faust. li. 22. ca. 20. Nullus hominum est, tanta iustitia prae­ditus, cui non sit necessaria tentatio tribulationis, vel ad perficiendam, vel ad confirmandam, vel ad proban­dam virtutem., erudition, and probation. They maintaine a remainder of temporall punishment, after sinne remitted, not onely in this present life, but after the same, in Purgatorie.

Further we beleeue, That the affliction or paine of Chastise­ment, B inflicted vpon penitent sinners, may by prayer of Faith, exercise of Vertue, Humiliation, and Mortification, be eyther remooued, or else mitigated, and conuerted to the encrease of grace and glorie in those, which with patience and holinesse en­dure the same in this life. But wee denie, eyther that any paine followeth iust persons after their decease, or that in this life they can by Prayer, Mortification, or any good workes, merit release of any Temporall Mulct, or satisfie the Diuine Iustice for the least fault or guilt of any sinne, on their owne behalfe, much lesse for others. C

And whereas the Iesuit affirmeth, That he can produce Te­stimonies of the antient Fathers, in great number, both for our necessitie of suffering voluntarie afflictions, and also for the ef­ficacitie thereof, to expiate sinne, and to satisfie: I answer,

First, That the Fathers, and holy Scriptures, require workes of Humiliation and Mortification, not as meritorious, but onely as meanes and causes impetrant, or deprecant, to appease Gods wrath for sinne.

Secondly, The Fathers vnderstand not the word Satisfaction strictly, and in rigor, for satisfaction of condignitie, as Romists doe Suar. [...]. 4. in 3. p. Tho. Disp. 48. Sect. 3. qui citat. Gabriel. Adrian. Nauar. [...]. Soto. [...], Ad­dit. ad. 3. p. Tho. q. 20. Difficult. 2. Conclus. 2. Si sa­tisfactio conside­retur secundū om­nia quae habet, quia scilicet, simul est ab homine & à Deo, simpliciter est satisfactio condigna. Vasq. tom. 4. in 3. p. Tho. q. 94. Dub. 3. Omnes Doctores antiqui supponere videntur, esse nostra opera satisfactoria de condigno pro poena, &c. Ibid. Dub. 5. Si in operibus meritorijs concedimus condignitatem ad vitam aeter­nam, & ad augmentum sanctitatis, cur non etiam ad poenae remissionem?, E but improperly and largely, to wit, for satisfaction of de­precation, D congruitie, or impetration. And according to their acceptation, and vse, the word Satisfaction comprehendeth Contrition and Confession, and not Sacramentall Satisfaction onely. Also they require Satisfaction, as a remedie against the guilt of Mortall sinne, and not onely as a Purgatiue of Veniall sinne, or as a remedie against Temporall paine onely.

But to the end the Reader may euidently perceiue the Popish fraud, in peruerting the Sentences of the Fathers, concerning Satisfaction; I will in this place distinctly compare their Do­ctrine with the present Romish Tenet.

[Page 542] First, It is consessed, That many Fathers vse the word Satis­faction A [...]. d. poen. ca. [...]. [...] per [...] instituer at Deo satisfacere. ca. 7. Habes [...] satisfacias. Cyprian. Epist. 10. Deo patri misericordi, praecibus & [...] suis satisfacere. Epist. 27. Deo satisfacere debent. Epist. 40. Dominus [...], & continua satisfactio­ne [...] est. Idem. Epist. 55. & epist. 64. Et. [...]. Et Eleemos. [...] li. d. lapsis. [...]. [...]. [...]. Aug. li. 50. Hom. vit. ca. 4. Leo. Epist. 79. ad Nicet. ca. 5. Et epist. [...]. ca. [...]. & 92. ca. 2., and require penitent Persons to performe the same to God and men.

Secondly, Within the name of Satisfaction, they include and comprehend contrition to God, confession, and amend­ment of life Cypra. Epi. 26. Eluendae sunt im­pio Sacrificio ma­nus inquinatae, operibus bonis, & nesario cibo or a misera polluta, poenitētiae sunt verae sermonibus expianda, & B in secretis cordis fidelis nouellandus & [...] est animus: crebri poenitentium gemitus audiantur. Et iterum sideles ex oculis lachrimae [...], vt illi ipsi oculi, qui male simulachra conspexerunt, quae [...] commiserunt, satisfacientibus Deo [...] deleant. [...]. li. a. Lapsis. Qui sic Deo [...], qui poeniten­tia facti sui, qui pudore delicti plus virtutis & sidei, &c. Ambros. ad Virg. Laps. ca. 8. Chrys. d. Lazaro. Hom. 4. Aug. li. 50 Hom. 5. Non sufficit mores in melius commutare, & à factis malis recedere, nisi etiam de his, quae sacta sunt, satisfiat Deo, per poenitentiae [...], per humilitatis [...], per contriti cordis Sacrificium, coope­rantibus Eleemosynis..

Thirdly, they require satisfaction for the fault and eternall guilt of sinne Ambr. ad Virg. corrupt. Si futuras poenas [...] perpetuas, in hoc [...] vitae spacio compensauerit, &c. Tertul. d. poen. ca. 9. Temporali [...] aeterna supplicia non di­cam frustretur, sed expungat. Cyprian. Epist. 52. Pro [...] & purgando delicto tuo, &c. Ep. 55. Datur C opera ne satisfactionibus & lamentationibus iustis delicta [...]. [...]. in Psal. 118. (exitus Aquarum, &c.) Nunc quoque non desinit verae poenit entiae [...], veteris facti crimen abluere. Pacian. Paroen. ad Poen. Hieron. Epist. 30. ca. 2. Cassian. collat. 23. ca. [...]. Quisquis post Baptismum, & scientiam Dei, in illud mor­tis corpus [...], hoc est in aliquod capitale [...], [...] se non quotidiana gratia Dei, id est facili re­missione, &c. sed [...] afflictione [...]. ac poenali dolore purgandum, aut certe pro his [...] futuro aeterni ignis supplicijs addicendum. Eucherius. Hom. 5. ad Monach. Non leui agendum est contritione, vt debita illa re dimantur, quibus [...] aeterna debetur. Nec transitoria opus est satisfactione pro malis [...], [...] quae paratus est ignis aeternus. and not onely for remoouall of temporall pu­nishment.

Fourthly, the word Satisfaction is taken in two notions: First, strictly for a iust and equall compensation of the iniurie committed against God, which Schoolemen tearme, Satisfacti­on D of condignitie Vasques in 3. part. Tho. to. 4. d. poen. q. 94. ar. 1. dub. 3. Si [...] opera iustorū esse de condigno satisfactoria, illud asserere debemus ex [...] ipsorum [...], quae in homine iusto ex auxilio dei facta sunt [...], atque adeo non ex Dei benigna acceptatione, qua [...] ipsis operibus contentus esse, etiamsi illa minus condigna sunt: hoc vero dixerim de latisfactione extra [...], illa enim debet esse condigna absque condonatione [...], alias non [...] latisfactio, nec debet concedi in [...] applicationem meritorum Christi, additam ipsi [...] satisfactorio. Cornel. d. lap. in Daniel 4. v. 24. [...] culpa, meretur ex condigno remissionem poenae reliquae. [...]. Harmon. Euang. li. 2. ca. 1. Theoria. 10. [...] satisfactionem esse de condigno & iustitia.. Secondly, for an interpretatiue compen­sation (as Durand Dur and. 4. d. 15 q. 1. nu. 6. arqualitas proprie dicta, &c. vel secundum acceptationem eius [...] sit emenda, & haec est aequalitas interpretatius solum. [...] in 3. dist. 19. §. 1. Sciendum satisfactionem non aliud esse, quam debiti [...], [...] satisfactionis no­men E latius quandoque patet, vt etiam is satisfacere dicatur, qui vel se, vel alium quacunque ratione debitis apud creditorem liberat. Exigit [...] aliquando creditor, [...] rigorem debitum est, aliquando autem contentus est accipere quantum satis est misericordiae. Vbi quidem sola prior illa perfecta est, & proprij nominis satisfactio: posterior vero non, ex iusta [...] aestimatione, [...] ex creditoris indul­gentia inter satisfactiones [...]. Coenick. d. [...]. [...]. Disp. 10. dub. 3. no. 19. Satisfactio decon­gruo non potest absolute dici satisfactio, sed tantum secundum quid. [...]. 3. d. 20. q. 2. [...] est se­cundum acceptationem [...] cui fit, vocatur satisfactio de congruo.) tearmeth it, grounded vpon Diuine fa­uour and acceptation, and not vpon the compleat dignity of the [Page 543] action. The Schoolemen tearme this latter, satisfaction of [...] A and Impetration (because God in his fauourable indul­gence [...] more on mans part, as necessarie to remission of sinnes, and because he is intreated by the same to release the punishment deserued.) The first kind of satisfaction was made by Christ alone Cassand. Con­sult. d. [...]. De hac satisfactione non [...] erit conquet endilocus, si ex Ecclesiae sen­tentia, hunc in modum doceatur, quod sola passie & mors vnigeniti filij Dei, sit satisfactio & [...] pro peccatis nostris, siue eo quod ex Origine contraximus, fiue ijs quae ante, vel post regenerationem, ex carnis B infirmitate commisimus quae satisfactio offertur & applicatur nobis [...], id est verbi, & Saera­mentorum., both for fault and guilt of sinne. The latter (according to the speaking of sundry Fathers) is performed by penitent Persons Cypr. Epist. 40. Quibus Dominus longa & continua [...] placandus est. Tertul. d. poenit. ca. 5. Qui per delictorum poenitentiam instituerat Domino [...]., by their contrition, [...], confession, and other penitentiall actions.

Fiftly, repentance may be exercised priuately onely before God, or els openly and before men. The antient Church obser­ued a seuere discipline, and imposed vpon notorious and enor­mious sinners open penance Euseb. hist. Ec­cles. li. 3. ca. 17. Et. li. 5. ca. 27. Et. li. 6. ca. 35. Iren. li. 1. ca. 9. Ambros. d poen. li. 1. ca. 16 Sosomen. hist. Eccl. li. 7. c. 16., causing them to make satisfaction to the Church, and to testifie their vnfeigned repentance to God by externall signes, and by actions of humiliation and mortification. Also in the dayes of the Fathers, sinners which had voluntarily confessed their offences to the Pastours of the C Church, were by them inioyned, to a strict manner of humiliati­on, and exercise of workes of charitie and mortification Cassan. Consult. d. [...]. In veteri Ecclesia, vt segnio­res excitarentur. poenitentibus ob grauiora [...] certa tempora & officia definita fu­erunt, quibus non solum coram Deo interiorem animi [...] exci­tarent, & exerce­rent, sed etiam Ec­clesiae vere se at (que) ex animo peccatī poenitere, declara­rēt, at (que) ita manus impositione Epis­copi & cleri, Ecclesiae reconciliarentur, & ius communicationis acciperent, atque [...] prescripta officia, [...] satisfactiones feu poenae vocabantur, quae vt [...] Episcoporum & Pastorum in abusū, ita quoque negligentia & signitia [...] pastorum [...] populi [...] in [...] venerunt. B. Rhenanus. Annot. in Terr. d. poenit.. And the fathers stiled these Penitentiall actions by the name of Sa­tisfaction, partly in respect of men offended August. [...]. ca. 65. Recte constituuntur ab eis qui praesunt Ecclesiae tempora poe­nitentiae, vt fiat etiam satis Ecclesiae, in qūa remittuntur peccata., partly in the re­gard of Offenders themselues, who because they did that which was inioyned them by their spirituall guides, to appease the in­dignation of God, were said to make satisfaction. But the Fa­thers did not hereby exalt Poenitentiall deedes to a sufficiency or equalitie of satisfying Gods iustice (for this effect is proper onely to the actions aud passions of the Sonne of God) but they D tearmed that, satisfaction, which they iudged meet or necessary for sinners to performe, that they might preuent Diuine indig­nation, and whereby they might repaire the spirituall detri­ment which they had incurred by falling into sinne.

Sixtly and lastly, Marsilius ab Inguen Marsi. 4. quae. [...] ar. 2. Satisfactio sa­cramentalis E potest capi [...], vno modo [...] vim vocis, & sic satisfactio diceretur omnes illi actus volun­tatis eliciti & imperati, quibus anima satisfacit deo, pro commisso crimine. Et hoc modo contritio, & [...], & [...], [...] este partes satisfactionis quia sunt actus eliciti: vt contritio, electio [...]. confes­sio, interior, & [...], [...] exterior actus imperatus quibus satisfacimus Deo. Et hoc modo satisfactio non est [...] poenitentiae scilicet, [...] est [...] Sacramentum. Alio modo satisfactio capitur re­stricte [...] elicitis & imperatis [...] contritionem & confessionem, & sic est pars Sacramenti poenitentiae, [...] est contritio [...] pars, vel etiam confessio: sed ab ea presupposira. a famous Schoolman, ob­serueth [Page 544] [...], That Satisfaction sometimes importeth all the actions A [...] or imperate, which a sinner must performe on his part, that God may be pacified; and thus it containeth Contrition, Confession, &c. Sometimes it noteth onely those Acts which follow Contrationand Confession, and are either voluntarily assumed, or imposed by a Confessour. The Fathers vsed the word Satisfaction in the first notion, and they knew no Sacra­mentall Satisfaction [...] Con. [...] d. [...]. ar. [...]. [...] etiá ex ordine [...], non fami­liarem siue priuatam poenitentiam, ne (que) quamuis publicam, sed solennem tantū Sacramentū dici affirmant., but onely of Discipline, or priuate hu­miliation.

Now the Romists in their course of Doctrine, haue misera­bly B [...] all this.

First, That which the Fathers speake of the fault and guilt of sinne, they wrest to the temporall paine of mortall sinne, re­mayning after the remission of the euerlasting guilt Greg. Val. l. d. Satisfact. cap. 1. [...]. d. Instruct. [...]. lib. 3. cap. 11. Victoria. sum. d. Sacram. d. poenit. nu. 109. [...]. 4. d. 15. q. 1. [...]. tom. 4. disp. 49. sect. 1. Cardub. lib. 5. d. Indulg. q. 2. Medina. d. [...]. per quinque prima capita..

Secondly, That which the Fathers stiled Satisfaction impro­perly, and by way of deprecation Cassand. Con­sultd. Confess. ar. 12. Si ex motu & afflatu Spiritus Sancti [...] ad [...] remissionem peccati faciunt. Cyprian. d. Laps. Sect. 24. [...] fletibus, planctibus Dominum [...]. [...]. ex var. in Math. Hom. 16. Pro omnibusillis accepit poenitentiam comitem, quae Aduocati locum [...]., they make Satisfaction of Condignitie, yea, in rigour of Iustice Nazarius. in 3. p. Thom. q. 1. ar. 2. contr. 7. pa. 113. Si tamen accipiatur, vt satisfactioni Christi [...], vnum babebit cum ea vaiorem, ac proinde [...], [...] satisfactionis Christi, esse de rigore iustitiae.; and for veniall sinnes, C more effectuall than Christs satisfaction Ibid. Contr. 6. Satisfactio Christi licet sit [...], & ex hac parte vberior & a­bundantior quam satisfactio hominisiusti pro suo [...] veniali, tamen cum istius satisfactio ex auxilio gratiae efficacior sit ad [...] maculam [...] venialis, sequitur non esse perfectiorem satisfactionem Christi, quam sit satisfactio hominisiusti, pro suo [...] veniali, in genere satisfactionis ad effectum de­lendi peccatum, & extinguendum debitum illius, licet satisfactio Christi in ratione operationis & meriti [...] sit. Suares. tom. 4. disp. 48. sect. 3..

Thirdly, That which in the ancient Church was a worke D of discipline Cassand. ibid. vt hac disciplina [...] ho­mines ad [...] dignos fructus faciendos [...]., or Christian mortification, they make Sacra­mentall.

Fourthly, Whereas the Fathers placed Satisfaction in all [...] actions, inward, and outward Aug. Ap. Grat. d. poen. dist. 1. c. 63. Non sufficit mores in melius commu­tare & à preteritis malis [...], nisi etiam de his quae facta [...], [...] fiat Deo per [...] dolorem, per humilitatis [...], per contriti cordis Sacrificium, cooperantibus [...] & ieiunijs.; and especially in such actions as were commanded by God, as necessarie to ob­taine remission of sinnes: The Romists restraine the same to externall actions, succeeding Contrition and Confession, and principally to electious, and voluntarie actions Bellarm. d. poen. l. 4. c. 13. Lioet sententia sit [...] probabilis, [...], Durandi; Paludani, &c. Non [...] satisfieri per opera alias debita. [...]. in Confess. ca. 48. Dare operam [...] placatum tibi reddas, non [...] a [...], verum etiam in debita quaedam o­pera faciendo, &c. Palud. 4. d. 15. q. 1. [...]. 2. [...]. v. satisfactio q. 8. [...]. 4. d. 15. q. 2. du. 1. [...]. ib. d. 15. q. 1. ar. 7. not. 1.. E

[Page 545] Fiftly, The Fathers gaue not absolution to [...], vntill such A time as they had accomplished the penitentiall actions inioy­ned Cassand. Con­sult. d. Confess. Hoc autem inter­est inter Actionem poenitentiae seu exomologesin veteribus vsitatam, & cam quae nunc vsu recepta est, quod olim nisi his operibus ab Ecclesiae praefecto iniunctis rite peractis, absolutio, & reconciliatio, & communionis ius, per manus impositionem non concedebatur, vt ex multis Tertulliani & Cypriani locis constat, &c. Hodie vero statim à facta con­sessione, manus poenitenti imponitur, & ad communionis ius admittitur.. Romists set the Cart before the Horse, and absolue, be­fore satisfaction is made; which is, as one saith, To set Easter before Lent.

IESVIT. B

But J suppose they are to your Maiestie well knowne, and therefore in the proposed difficultie, supposing the sa­tisfaction for sinne to be possible, you mooue this doubt, Whether the penitents can so fully satisfie for themselues, as their satisfactions may superabound, and bee referred vnto the treasure of the Church? to satisfie this doubt, three Propositions are to be prooued.

ANSWER. C

It is well knowne to his gracious Maiestie, that you peruert the meaning of the Fathers, and from the word Satisfaction, vsed by them in one Notion, you argue to another, that is, from Satisfaction impetrant, which is an action, or fruit of the vertue of Repentance, you conclude your Romish Sacramen­tall Satisfaction of Condignitie.

IESVIT. D

The first, That Good workes of Saints that are poenall and afflictiue, doe not onely merit heauen, but also satisfie for sinne, this is prooued; giuing of Almes for the loue of Christ is meritorious, witnesse our Sauiour him­selfe, who to the iust (in reward of their Almes) will giue, The Kingdome prepared from the beginning Math. 25. 34. of the world.

ANSVVER. E

First, You argue out of Saint Matthew 25. 34. from re­ward of Workes, to merit of Workes. But you must ob­serue, that there is a reward of meere bountie, as well as of [Page 546] desert, [...]. 127.2 Vet. [...]. Fihj merces fructus ventris.. Ezech. 29.18 [...]. Cod. d. poen. tr. 3. d. Sa­tisfact. q. 2. pa. 292. [...] nomine mercedis Scriptura vtatur, nòn tamèn inde fit vt debito, & ex iustitia proprie sump­ta Regnum AEgipti illi Regi fuerit traditum, sed [...], illic largè accipitur, & ad omnem remunerationem etiàm gratiosam se extendit.. Gen. 30.18. Also, [...] A reason and cause why the kingdome of Heauen is bestow­ed, is not meritorious; but some causes are dispositiue, [...], or impetrant.

IESVIT.

And it is also satisfactorie for sinne, witnes Daniel, B Daniel. 4.24. who gaue this councell vnto the Babylonian King: Re­deeme thy sinnes with Almes-deeds, and thine ini­quities with mercies vnto the poore.

ANSWER.

The place of Daniell 4.24. (according to the vulgar Tran­slation Peccata tua Eleemosinis redi­me, &c.) speaketh of redeeming sinnes in regard of the fault and eternall guilt, and not onely of temporall punishment. Also of redeeming sinnes in this life, and not of redeming them in C Purgatorie. Besides if Nabuchadonosor were an vniust person Hieron. sup. Esa. 14. Omnes a­nimae apud Infe­ros, aliquam re­quiem accipient, tu solus in extre­mas tenebras reli­gaberis, omnium enim operieris sā ­guine & vniuer­sorū cruor te pre­met velut obuolu­tum sanie mortu­orum., Esa. 14.15. then according to your owne position, he could not make satisfaction for sinne. Lastly, the punishment threat­ned and foretold in that Scripture, is such, as Bellarmine Bellarm. d. In­dulg. lib. 2. cap. 1. Poena quarum fit mentio, Psal. 88. Heb. 11. &c. Ad forum externum pertinent, [...] enim à Deo tanquam Iudice in externo & criminali [...], nam si non potest ldulgentia tollere poenam qua Pretor aliquem mulctauit ob furtum vel homicidium, quantò minus [...] poterit cam quam Deus ipse alicui decreuit. him­selfe confesseth, belongeth not to the Court of Penance, and Papall Indulgences. And if Popes Pardons, and Romish Satis­factions could deliuer sinners from frenzie, and losse of out­ward goods, and temporall dominion, the mad-men in Bedlam, and decayed merchants, and other afflicted persons throughout the Christian world, would become suitors to his Holinesse, to D insert these, and other such like temporall calamities into the Patent of his Indulgences and Iubilees.

Also the place of Daniell is vnderstood litterally of breaking of sinnes by almes-deeds: as if one preaching to an extortio­ner, should say, Breake off thy sinfull courses, by imitating Za­cheus, &c. Now what merit is there in this, or what immediate E satisfaction to God? for this is rather satisfaction to man in re­gard of ciuill iniurie.

Lastly, there is no ground either in Scripture, or in Traditi­on, for this Romish doctrine, to wit, the temporall paine of [Page 547] personall sinne remaining after this life, may be remooued or A expiated by humane satisfactions: for whatsoeuer is spoken in holy Scripture, or by antient Fathers, concerning redeeming sinnes by Satisfaction, belongs to the fault, and eternall paine of sinne, as well as to the temporall punishment; and the sa­tisfaction must be performed by the delinquent person him­selfe, in this present life. Also the redemption or satisfaction possible to be performed by man, is by way of deprecation onely, and not by iust compensation. And (if there were a Pur­gatorie) because the paines thereof would be proportioned B and stinted by the diuine Will and Decree, it could not rest in the power of any creature to mittigate and remooue the same: but euerie soule descending into that place of darkenesse (if any such lake were) must continue in torment vntill it had paid the vttermost farthing. For if in this present world, which is a time of mercie, after satisfaction performed by penitent persons themselues, or by the redundant merits of Saints Bellar. in Sim­bol. A post. ar. 9 pa. 123. Ecclesia quae est in terris com­municat suffragia Ecclesiae quae est in Purgatorio: Et Ecclesia quae est in Coelis commu­nicat orationes, & merita sua cum Ecclesia quae est in terris., and after the said satisfactions are applied by Papall Indulgences, no temporall paine ceaseth infallibly, no not so much as the paine of one tooth, but the same continueth as before: It is altoge­ther C improbable to imagine (vnlesse diuine Reuelation were extant to prooue the same, and which is not) that it is other­wise, or in a contrarie manner, touching any paines after this life. And Papalls abuse the testimonies of Scripture, making them grounds of Popes Pardons, because the said Scriptures treat of worldly pressures and afflictions inflicted vpon iusti­fied persons; for example, triall, humiliation, preuention, &c. (as appeareth in Dauid Aug. contra Faust. lib. 22. cap. 67. Nequè prae­termissa est in il­lo, secundum Dei comminationem flagelli paterni Disciplina, vt & confessus in aeternum liberaretur, & D afflictus temporaliter probaretur., 2. Sam. 12.) and not of the inuisible torments of Purgatorie.

IESVIT.

And S. Chrysostome, who saith, There is no sinne Chrys. Hom. 25. in Act. Apost. Cyprian. Serm. d. Eleemosyna. which giuing of Almes cannot cancell: and S. Cyprian, Eleemosynis atquè operibus iustis delictorum flam­ma sopitur.

ANSWER. E

S. Chrysostome, and S. Cyprian, in the places obiected, speake of the effect of Almes to please God, being an acceptable sacrifice [Page 548] to him, by way of deprecation or impetration Cyprian. d. O­pere. & Eleemos. nu. 5. Nequè pro­mereri misericor­diam Domini po­terit, qui miseri­cors ipse non fue­rit, aut impetrabit de diuina miseri­cordia aliquid in praecibus, qui ad praecem pauperis non fuerit humanus. Ibid. Nec pro defuncto suis vocibus, sed ipsius ope­ribus [...], &c., and not by A way of condigne and equall satisfaction. And Delictorum flam­ma Aug. in Psalm. 143. Tanquam vnda misericordiae, peccati ignis extinguitur. in S. Cyprian, is not onely the temporall punishment of sinnes, but the guiltinesse of eternall punishment ( Iob. 31.12.) and the lust and concupiscence concomitant to foule sinnes, which by repentance, and the fruits thereof, is abated and mor­tified.

IESVIT. B

Prayer is likewise meritorious with God. Our Sauiour Math. 6.6.7. exhorteth euery man to pray secretly in his Closet, promi­sing, that Thy Father who seeth what is done in se­cret will reward thee. It is also satisfactorie for sinne, Aug. Enchir. ca. 71. as S. Augustine saith: The dayly prayer of the faith­full doth satisfie for their quotidian, and light offences, without which none can lead this life.

ANSWER. C

If beggers, or other suitors, by crauing Almes, or by ma­king supplication, do not merit from men (which are in most things their equals) it is incredible, that man by Prayer is able to merit, according to iustice, with God. And the word Re­ward, Math. 6. prooueth not Merit, because there is reward of grace, and bountie, as well as of desert, Rom. 4.4. S. Augustine Aug. Enchir. ca. 71. Delet & il­la, à quibus vita fidelium sceleratè etiam gesta, sed paenitendo in me­lius mutata disce­dit. in the place obiected, speaketh of Satisfaction by way of de­precation: and hee also saith, That the Lords Prayer ioyned D with repentance, wipeth out grieuous sinnes, which must neces­sarily be vnderstood by way of deprecation. Also he decla­reth himselfe in the next Chapter, saying, Multa sunt genera Eleemosinarum, quae cum facimus, adiuuamur vt dimittātur nobis pec­cata nostra. There are manie sorts of Almes, (among which Prayer for others is one) by bestowing whereof we are holpen, that our sinnes may be remitted. And he teacheth in another place Aug. e. duas Epist. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 7., in what manner Prayer and Almes-deeds are refer­red to remission of sinnes, saying, Eleemosynis & orationibus im­petrantibus, E Almes-deeds and Prayer impetrating, that is, obtai­ning by request.

IESVIT. A

To fast is meritorious, when it proceeds from a pure heart, to which our Sauiour in the sixt of S. Matthew, promised recompence: and that it is penall and satisfactory Ionae cap. vlt. for corporall penalties, the fact of the [...] shew­eth [...], so that the same workes of the iust (as pious) merit, and shall haue in heauen a plentifall reward; B as penall, satisfie and obtaine full remission of the tem­porall penalties remaining to be suffered for sinne. In confirmation whereof, memorable is the saying of S. Cy­prian, Cyprian. Serm. d. Laps. of feruent penance and punition of bodie, Qui sic Deo satisfacerit, &c. Non solam Deiveniam merebi­tur sed coronam.

ANSWER.

First, euerie thing is not meritorious to which a recompence C is promised, for there is recompence aboue merit, proceeding of meere bountie and grace.

Secondly, the example of the Niniuites prooueth not, that Fasting is satisfactorie for corporall punishments; but onely, that it being iomed with true repentance, is a meanes to impe­trate of God (when this standeth with his purpose) preuenti­on, release, or mitigation of temporall calamities. Besides, this action of the Niniuites appertaines not to sacramentall Satisfaction: And that Fasting is not condignly satisfacto­rie D [...] in Ad­dit. 3. p. Tho. q. 20. ar. 3. dif. 2. Simpli­citèr est dicendū, quod ista satisfa­ctio est condigna & infallibilis. Suar. in 3. p. Tho. to. 4. disp. 48. sect. 3. Bell. d. Indulg. li. 2. c. 9., appeareth, because no fasting is able infallibly to pre­uent or remooue temporall plagues, 2. Sam. 12.22. But if Fa­sting were satisfactorie in condignitie, then it were iniust with God to inflict or continue temporall plagues, after Satisfaction made by Fasting.

S. Cyprian in the place obiected, speaketh of satisfaction for sinne it selfe Cyprian. d. Laps. sect. 28. Iu­stis operibus in­cumbere, quibus peccata purgātur. Eleemosynis fre­quentèr insistere, quibus à morte [...]., and not for the temporall paine. And by Satis­faction, he vnderstandeth deprecant Satisfaction, not compen­sant [...]. [...]. Nec Dominum grauiter offensum, longa & [...] paenitentia deprece­tur. Ib. sect. 24. Iejunijs, fletibus, planctibus, Dominum deprecari, [...] ad Dominum [...], & [...] criminis, [...] doloribus exprimentes; [...] deprecemur.. But to argue from appeasing Gods anger, by way of deprecation, to condigne Satisfaction, is most rude and incon­sequent. E

IESVIT. A

The second Proposition: Many Saints endured more penalties and afflictions in this life, than were necessarie for the recompensing of the temporall: paines due to their sinnes: The blessed Virgin neuer committed actuall sinne, witnesse Ambros. Serm. vlt. in Psal. 118. Aug. d. Nat. & Grat. c. 36. Saint Ambrose, terming her, ab omni [...] labe peccati. And Saint Augustine, saying, Plus gratiae ei collatum est ad vincendum ex omni parte peccatum: B Yet she indured many afflictions, as her many iourneys, spe­cially her banishment into Egypt, her standing at the foote of the Crosse, when the sword of sorrow pierced thorow her heart; besides her many voluntarie fastings and pray­ings, and other penitentiall workes, which were daily practised in the course of her most holy life. Saint Iohn the Luc. 1. v. 8. Greg. in ca. 2. Iob. Baptist, what a pure and immaeulate course of life held he from his infancie, in the wildernesse? Neuer committed C any great sinnes, yea, scarce so much as light sinnes, as the Fathers teach; gathering their opinion of this his san­ctitie from the Scripture. And yet extreamely penitentiall was he in his continuall fasting, praying, lying on the ground, induring cold, wind, and weather, his wearing continually a rough haire cloth, whereof S. Paulinus writes,

Vestis erat curui setis compacta Cameli,
Contra luxuriam molles duraret vt artus, D
Arceretque graues compuncto corpore somnos.

What a mightie Masse of super-abounding Satisfacti­ons, were gathered from the life of this Saint alone?

The Prophets of the Old Testament, What afflictions did they indure? (which Saint Paul gathers together in Ad Hebr. 11.38. the eleuenth Chapter of his Epistle to the Hebrews) being neuerthelesse, men of most holy life, innocent, and without any grieuous sinnes, that the world was vnworthie of E them. As also the Apostles, whose labours were intollera­ble, specially such, as Saint Paul records, endured by him­selfe; 1. Cor. 4. 2. Cor. 18. who yet after Baptisme (in which, his sinnes were [Page 551] fully and certainely-remitted) neuer did grieuously offend A God. The labours and torments of Martyrs were ex­treame, Cypr. li. 4. Epist. 2. and yet any the least Martyrdome is sufficient to satisfie for any great multitude of offences, Quoad Rea­tum Aug. tract. 84. in Iohan. culpae & poenae, of whose merits, the Church (in the Primitiue times) did make most account; to whom after­wards succeeded another kind of Martyrdome, Horrore quidem mitius, sed diuturnitate molestius, Of holy Bernard. Serm. 4. in Cantica. Confessours, specially of many most holy Eremites. B

These manifold afflictions endured by Saints (farre aboue the measure of the temporall penaltie, which after the eternall, was graciously remitted, did remaine due to their offences) did not perish, nor were forgotten, but were laid vp in the memorie of God.

ANSVVER. C

In this Section, two things are affirmed by the Aduersarie: First, That many Saints, to wit, the B. Virgin, S. Iohn Baptist, the Prophets, the holy Apostles, the Martyrs, Confessors, and Ere­mites, endured many more penalties in this world, than were necessarie, for the expiating and recompensing the temporall paine due to their sinnes: And the reason or proofe hereof is, Some of these were free from Actuall sinne, Veniall, and Mor­tall; others were guiltie of no mortall sinne. Secondly, The superabundant Passions of these Saints perished not, but was layd vp in the memorie of God. D

I answer: It is a manifest vntruth, that any of these Saints were free from all sinne: For S. Iohn speaking in the person of all the Elect, saith, 1. Ioh. 1. 8. If wee say wee haue no sinne, wee de­ceiue our selues, and there is no truth in vs: vers. 10. If wee say wee haue not sinned, wee make him a lyar, and his Word is not in vs August. Enchir. ca. 64. Quamuis de illis sit vera citer di­ctum, Quotquot Spiritu Dei agun­tur, hi filij sunt Dei: sic tamen Spiritu Dei excitantur, [...] tanquam filij Dei proficiunt ad Deum, vt etiam [...] suo, ma­ximè E aggrauante corruptibili corpore, tanquam filij hominum, quibusdam motibus humanis deficiant ad [...], & ideo [...]. Idem, d. Ciuit. Dei, li. 14. ca. 9. Tunc [...] ista erit, quando peecatum nullum in [...]. Nunc verò satis benè viuitur, si sine crimine, sine peccato autem qui viuere se existimat, non id agit vt peccatum non habeat, sed vt veniam non accipiat. Idem, sup. Psal. 44. c. 2. Maria ex Adam mor­tua est propter peccatum, &c. Idem, d. Pecc. Merit. li. 2. ca. 30. [...] indeclinabilem fidei sententi­am, solus vnus est, qui sine peccato mortuus est, &c.. Also the B. Virgin reioyced in God her Sauiour: and hee is Iesus, a Sauiour, to saue his people from their sinnes. Shee vsed the Lords Prayer, together with other Beleeuers, Act. 1.14. [Page 552] But one Petition of this Prayer is, Forgiue vs our Trespasses, A Matth. 6. 12. Lastly, the sacred Scripture teacheth not, that any of these Saints were free from all sinne, neyther is there any other sufficient Argument to confirme this Assertion. And S. Augustine Idem, c. duas Epist. Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 4. Pati mor­tem sine meritis mortis de vno solo Mediatore Catholica fides est. saith, It is against the Catholike Faith, that any be­sides Christ suffered Death, without the merit of Death.

But if it were yeelded, that these Saints were free from all sinne; and that they endured more Pressures and Calamities in the World, than themselues deserued; and that their super­abundant B Passions did not perish, but were layd vp in the me­morie of God: it followeth not, that their Passions were re­serued, to rayse a Treasurie of Satisfactions, for redemption of other mens sinnes. But euen as God in this World appointed these Afflictions, to be matter and occasion of greater Sanctitie and Vertue in them, and proposed these Persons to be Lights and Examples to others, in their Actions and Sufferings: so likewise he layd vp these things in the Treasurie of his eternall Memorie, that he might crowne and dignifie them aboue other Saints, with a large augmentation of Glorie and Blisse, Matth. C 19.28. So we see vpon how weake and rotten ground is built this imaginarie Castle of Church-Treasure.

IESVIT.

The third Proposition, the Treasure of the Church con­sisteth principally of the superabundant Satisfaction of Christ, who did endure much more than was necessarie, for the Redemption of man; wherewith are ioyned the Satis­faction D of Saints. Wee ioyne the Satisfaction of Saints with the Satisfaction of Christs in the Churches Treasure, not because we beleeue the Bloud of Christ to be insufficient a­lone to satisfie for sinnes, Nisi velut arescentis & exhau­sti defectus aliunde suppleatur & sufficiatur (as mi­stakingly, not to say calumniously, Caluin reporteth of Calu Institut. li. 3. ca. 5. vs.) For Pope Clement the sixt (whom Protestants ac­cuse Clemens Sextus in Constit. vnigenit. as the first Author of this Treasure) affirmes euen in E his constitution about this matter, That the Bloud of Christ is of an infinite price, and euerie drop thereof sufficient to cancell the sinnes of the whole World.

ANSWER. A

First, If the Bloud of Christ is of infinite price, To what purpose doe you conioyne the bloud of [...]. Sum. li. 5. d. Remiss. & Disp. Filius Dei non solum guttā, sed totum sangui­nem fudit pro peccatoribus, & praeterea Martyres pro fide & Eccle­sia sanguinem su­um fuderunt, & vltra quod peccas­sent puniti fue­runt, restat quod in dicta effusione, omne peccatū pu­nitum est, & [...] sanguinis effusio, est Thesaurus, in [...] Ecclesiae repositus, cuius claues Ecclesia inde, quando vult potest scrinium aperire & [...] cui voluerit communicare remissiones & indulgentias fidelibus faciendo, & sic peccatum non rema­net impunitum, quia punitum fuit in Filio Dei, & Martyribus sanctis suis. Martyrs, and the vo­luntarie Passions of Creatures, to the same? For is any man so foolish, as to adde the Light of a Candle to the cleare Light of the Sunne? If you answere, They are conioyned, not in equalitie, but by Subordination; I demand, Where hath the Sonne of God appointed this? And if you couple humane B Satisfactions to Christs expiation of veniall sinne Antouin. Sum. p. 1. Tit. 10. ca. 3. Potest vt videtur per Indulgentiam in quantum habet rationem cuiusdam absolutionis, remitti culpa C [...]. Palud. 4. d. 20. q. 4. Viguer. Instit. c. [...]. vers. 22., and the temporall paine of mortall; you may vpon as good warrant doe it, for the attonement of the eternall punishment: because (according to your former Tenet) by mysticall Vnion, the Actions and Passions of the Members, are the Actions and Passions of the Head Nazarius, in 3. p. Tho. q. 1. ar. 2. contr. 7. Praemittendum est, Christum esseveluti Hypostasin [...] corporis mystici, quod est Ecclesia, &c. Constat au­tem, Actiones & Passiones, tam capitis quam membrorum, eidem Hypostasi tribui, cuius sunt caput & membra. Ibid. Quia per gratiam ex Christi capitis influxu receptam, constituimur illius viua membra, quorum membrorum, Christus non solum est Caput: sed etiam suppositum, vt ante diximus: ideò hoc ipso, quod nos meremur, & satisfacimus, vt membra Christo Capiti vnita, & vt existentia in Christo, tan­quam in communi supposito, dicimur mereri, & satisfacere de toto rigore iustitiae; quia secundum [...] considerationem non tam nos meremur & satisfacimus in Christo, quàm Christus vt Caput, & vt mysticum suppositum, meretur & satisfacit in nobis. Ibid. Si mystici corporis Ecclesiae membra considerentur, qua­tenus simul cum Christo capite, vnum integrum & perfectum Ecclesiae corpus constituunt, dici verè & ab­solutè potest, corpus hoc mysticum per suum caput satisfecisse, de toto rigore justitiae, & superabundasse: non ob eam tantum causam, quod Christus qui Caput est mystici corporis, sufficienter & de toto rigore [...] pro membris satisfecerit, fed ea etiam ratione, quod membrorum satisfactiones Christi Capitis sa­tisfactioni conjunctae, & vt vna completa satisfactio, cum ea consideratae perfectionem accipiunt, ita vt D considerata satisfactione ex parte Christi, cum extensione secundum suae virtutis participationem, ad om­nes & singulas membrorum satisfactiones à Christi satisfactione dependentes, dicatur Christus, tam [...] se, quàm in membris suis satisfacere, mereri, jejunare, &c. consideratis verò membrorum satis­factionibus, vt satisfactione Christi conjunctis, dicantur membra sufficienter, & ex toto rigore justitiae [...] pro peccatis, quatenus sunt offensa Dei. Sic enim quasi consequenter, satisfactio Christi mem­bris tribuitur, & ex parte membrorum se tenet, & cum eorum satisfactionibus computatur.; and consequently, they may partake vertue of satisfying, with the Passions of Christ.

Secondly, Although one drop of Christs Bloud, euen when he was Circumcised, and whipped, might haue beene sufficient for mans Redemption, if God had so ordayned; yet presupposing the Diuine Decree, and Ordinance, to the E contrarie, one drop of Christs Bloud is not sufficient to make Satisfaction for our sinnes; because Sufficiencie in this kind, is to be measured by the Wisedome, Will, and Acceptati­on of the Ordayner; which requireth as much as himselfe [Page 554] appointed, and decreed should be; and neyther more, nor A lesse Durand. 3. Dist. 20. q. 2. Po­tuisset si voluisset reparare humanam naturam, [...] & reparando per satisfactionem potuisset pro satisfa [...], puri hommis, &c. [...]. 3. d. 20. q. 2. [...], quod non est [...] Deo [...]. [...], 3. d. 19. [...] 20. [...]. 4. Conclus. 2. [...] Redemptione, quod bonitas illius [...] cuius [...] detinetur: Sed [...] homo [...], a Diabolo potuit acceptare pro offensa illata per hominem, [...] modi [...]: Et [...] intelligenda [...] cum [...], [...] Christi sufficere potuit pro [...] totius humani generis..

It is remarkable, how these Romane Higlars, with one [...], both magnifie and debase the price of Christs Bloud. B For one while they say, That one drop thereof is sufficient to satisfie for all the sinnes of the World Extra. d. Poen. & Remiss. [...] 6. Non gut­tam sanguinismo­dicam quae tamen propter vnionem ad verbum, pro Redemptione to­tius humani ge­neris [...]. Angelus, [...]. Sum. v. Indulgen­tia, n. 9. Cuius minima gutta [...], vel sudo­ris, sufficeret ad Expiationem omnium peccatorum, quae vnquam fuerunt perpetrata, vel perpetrabuntur, quia eius [...] nihil sunt omnia.; and then againe they inferre, That it is fit it should be eeked out with an ad­dition of Saintly Satisfactions Nugnus, in Addit. 3. part. Tho. q. 20. ar. 3. dif. 1., to rayse a Stocke, to re­deeme Soules out of Purgatorie. Else why stint they not this Treasure vpon the maine Reuenue of Christs Passions onely? Their detected meaning is; Christs Bloud alone, yea, one drop thereof, is all-sufficient to saue Soules; but the same is insufficient to impregnate his Holinesse his Coffers [...]. Paris, in Henrico 3. Romanorum loculos impregnare. Ibid. pag. 316. Magister Otto Papae Nuntius, Literas recitauit, in quibus Papa allegauit Scandalum Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae, & opprobrium vetustis­simum, notam scilicet Concupiscentiae, quae radix dicitur omnium malorum, &c. Sed quoniam Scan­dali huius & infamiae, Romana paupertas causa est, debent boni filij matris inopiam subleuare, &c.: The C Bloud of Christ hath abundant vertue in it, to cleanse sinnes; but it must emendicate Vertue, to fill Purses, and to satisfie the Auarice of the Horse-leaches of Rome Angelus [...]. Sum. [...]. Indulg. nu. 2. Qui plus dat & magis laborat, caeteris paribus, plus ha­bebit. Illi qui plus dat, & plus laborat, correspondet annus efficacieoris Poenitentiae. [...], Bolog­ninus, tr. d. Indulg. n. 85. Sanctissimus Dominus Innocentius, concessit Indulgentiam, quod quicun­que D dederit Decem pro constructione Ecclesiae remittatur ei quinta pars peccatorum suorum: aut si quis offerat vno ictu quadraginta, sint remissa omnia peccata. [...], d. Indulg. lib. 1. cap. 16. Si quis visi­tat Ecclesiam, tamen ob paupertatem non facit Eleemosynam, an lucretur? Resp. Quod non lucra­tur, & ista (Opinio) est communis. Lucratur augmentum gratiae vel gloriae, sed non remissionem Poe­nae, seu adeptionem Indulgentiae. [...]. v. Indulg. n. 19. Nauar. [...]. Hist. Italiae, lib. 13. pag. 489. Leo. Laurentij Puccij quatuor Sanctorum Cardinalis, secutus Concilium, nullo tempo­rum & locorum habito delectu, per vniuersum Orbem amplissima priuilegia, quibus non modo viuis delictorum veniam consequendi, sed & defunctorum animas eius ignis in quo delicta expiari dicuntur, poenis eximendi facultatem pollicebatur, promulgarat: quae quia pecunia tantum à mortalibus extor­quendi gratia concedi notum erat, & à quaestoribus huic negotio praefectis impudenter administraban­tur, magnam plerisque in locis indignationem, offensionemque concitarant, & [...] in Germania vbi à multis ex eius ministris huiusmodi mortuos poenis liberandi facultas, paruo praetio vendi, vel in Cauponum Tabernis aliae subijci cernebantur. E.

Therefore good cause had Caluin, and so haue wee, to vindi­cate the honour of our Sauiour, and to protest against your de­rogating from the merit of his Bloud: which impietie, al­though [Page 555] you endeauour to colour your Doctrine, yet the A practise of your people (by you tollerated) madding vpon the merits of Saints, and contemning the merits of Christ, ac­counting the same drie and exhaust, is intollerable and exe­crable.

IESVIT.

The Reasons of this Coniunction, are these three: First, That Poenall workes of Saints, as they are satis­factorie, B be not without fruit; for being satisfactorie, and not hauing the effect of satisfaction, in their owne innocent and vndefiled persons, they will be without this fruit, and effect, except they be applyed vnto others that are poore and needie, in whom satisfaction is scant, and the debt of temporall, abounds.

ANSWER. C

First, It cannot be prooued by Diuine Reuelation, that Saints haue super-aboundant Satisfactions: for whatsoeuer afflicti­on and pressure they endured in this life, was necessarie or ex­pedient to set foorth Gods glorie, to confirme and consum­mate their owne vertue August. c. Faust. lib. 22. cap. 20. Nullus homi­num est tanta [...] preditus, cui non [...] necessaria tentatio tribulationis, vel ad perficiendam vel ad confirmandam vel ad probandam vir­tutem D nisi forte nec Paulum, &c., to edifie the Church of God, and to make themselues the better capable of that extraordinarie glorie and blisse, which was prepared as a Crowne, for such as transcend others in vertue Greg. Mor. lib. 3. cap. 1. Ex dolore verberis aucta est glo­ria remunerationis.

Secondly, If they had superaboundant Satisfactions, that is, If they endured Afflictions and Tryalls, more than were necessarie to satisfie for the Temporarie paine of their per­sonall sinnes; these superabundant Passions should not want a sufficient fruit, and effect, 2. Cor. 4. 17. 2. Tim. 4. 8. And the want of the proper fruit of Satisfaction, (beeing E recompenced with a large encrease, and surplusage in ano­ther kinde) can be no dishonour to God, or losse to them: For euen as it is in Prayer, although the most proper fruit and effect thereof, is to obtayne the thing requested, of God: and yet if God denie the particular request, 2. Cor. 12. [Page 556] a iust mans Prayer, considered as it is Prayer, wanteth not A the fruit, if God otherwise bestow that which is equiualent to the thing requested Bernard. Qua­drag. Serm. 5. Ne­mo vestrum fra­tres parui pendeat Orationem suam, dico enim quod ipse ad quem oramus, non paruipendet eam, & vnum è duobus sperare possumus, quoniam aut dabit quod petimus, aut quod nobis viderit esse vtilius.. So likewise if a man could super-abound in satisfying for his owne sinne, his Satisfaction were not fruit­lesse, if God make requitall by any other kind of benefit, e­quall or transcending the proper fruit and effect thereof.

IESVIT. B

The second, is the glorie of Christ, whose merits were so powerfull, as to purchase to the Church of God, such ex­cellent and admirable Saints, so pure of life, so perfect in Penance, as their satisfactions might suffice to pay the debt of temporall paine due vnto others.

ANSWER.

If one should affirme, It is more for the glory of Christ to C haue his merits so potent, as to purchase to himselfe a People, and Inheritance, which in this life, is perfectly innocent, and iust, needing no remission of sinnes, than to purchase a people, carrying alwayes about with them the remainders of sinne; he should not honour Christ, but prooue himselfe a lyer, 1. Ioh. 1. 8, 10. So likewise to affirme, That it is a greater honour to Christ, to haue his merits aduanced so farre, as that by the ver­tue thereof, men are made satisfiers of Diuine Iustice, together with Christ, carries a shew of honouring Christ, but it is in truth, a sacrilegious errour. And Papists may as well affirme, D that it is for Christs greater glorie, to make men subordinate Iustifiers, Redeemers, or whatsoeuer else their vertiginous fan­cie shall suggest.

IESVIT.

The third reason is, To make men loue the Church and societie of Saints; whereby they come to bee partakers of the aboundancie of her treasures, to pay their grieuous E debts. This is that comfortable Article which the Apostles put downe in the Creed, to be knowne of euery one, The Communion of Saints: This is that, which made King [Page 557] Dauid exult, saying, I am partaker with all them Psal. 118. v. 63. A that feare thee and keepe thy Commandements. And in this respect the Apostle exhorteth vs, Gratias a­gamus Col. 1.12. Deo Patri, qui dignos nos fecit in partem sor­tis Sanctorum in lumine. This is that which the same Apostle writes to the Corinthians, exhorting them to be liber all towards Titus and Luke; For the present, 1. Cor. 8.14. let your abundance (in temporall goods) supply their want, that [...] their abundance (in pious B workes) may bee a suppliment vnto your want. This hope to supply in this kinde the spirituall needs of Christians, by the abundance of his sufferings, made Saint Paul so much reioyce in them; I ioy ( saith hee) in my Collos. 1.24. 2. Cor. 12.15. sufferings for you, and I make full the things that want of the sufferings of Christ in my flesh, for his Bodie, which is the Church. And againe, Cupio impendi, & super impendi pro vobis: Out of which C words, Origen gathers, that Saint Paul ( as a kinde of Origen. Hom. 10. in Num. Victime or Sacrifice) did expiate the sinnes of others, not satisfying for the iniurie against God, nor for the eter­nall punishment due, but for one outward and transito­rie effect of sinne, to wit, the debt of temporall paine. In this sence also Saint Augustine interpreteth the for­mer Aug. in Psal. 61. words of the Apostle, Of suffering in his bodie the things wanting of the sufferings of Christ: Patitur Chri­stus D in membris suis, id est, in nobis ipsis, ad Com­munem hanc quasi Rempublicam. Nam quis (que) pro modulo nostro exoluimus quod debemus.

ANSWER.

The true loue of the Church, and of the Saints, is grounded vpon veritie, and not vpon Romish Fables, 2. Epist. Iohn vers. 1. And Communion of Saints, in the Apostles E Creed, in respect of the liuing, is Copartnership in Faith, in Veritie, in the bond of Loue, in pious and charitable Of­fices and Actions, and in the manifold graces of Christ: and towards the defunct, it is Communion of Loue, Imitation, Hope, and expectation of the same Glory Aug. d. Temp. Serm. 181. cap. 13..

[Page 558] But neither Scripture, nor Fathers teach, That the li­uing A Saints haue Communion with the Saints defunct, by partaking their superabundant Satisfactions, Eph. 4. 15, &c. 1. Ioh. 1.3. Rom. 12.4.

The saying of Dauid, Psal. 119.63. I am partaker with all them that feare thee and keepe thy Commandements [...]. in Com. AEqūe ego inquit, atque illi te timeo, [...] e­tiam mandata tua obseruo. Vnus e. nim ex illorum numero egosum, qui te maximè ve­nerantur at (que) ob­seruant., prooueth, That this holy man made righteous Persons his Friends and Associates, and that he shunned the fellowship of the wicked, Psal. 101.6. But of Communion of Satisfactions, he speaketh not a word. Also what a miserable inference is this, Dauid was partaker of all them which feared God, and kept his Commandements: B Ergo, He was Partaker of their Satisfactions, and those to God­ward. Is there no other bond, or Act of Fellowship but this onely? Haue all they which feare God and keepe his Com­mandements, according to the state of this life, superabundant Satisfactions? Yea, How appeareth it that Dauid had need of other mens Satisfactorie deedes? For he was a man after Gods owne heart, full of Grace, and abounding in works of mortifica­tion, Psal. 6.6. & 102.9. & Psal. 35. 13, yea of that ranke, to wit, a great Prophet Reade before the Iesuits words, Pag. 505., which our Aduersary himselfe saith, Re­ceiue not, but Communicate superabundant Satisfactions to C others wanting them.

S. Pauls text, Col. 1.12. speaketh of Partnership of heauenly inheritance Caietan. in Com. Sors San­ctorum, haereditas est Sanctorum, & est sensus ad habendam partem Haereditatis Sahctorum, hoc est ad participandum haere­ditatem Sanctorum, quae appellatur sors, quia non ex proprio consilio, non ex proprijs meritis, sed velut sorte, hoc est diuino munere obtigit ita illis, quod non alijs. Dyonis. Carthus. ib. Sortis Sanctorum id est haereditatis Electorum, &c. Lyra, [...] Card. &c., and not of Satisfactions.

The next place, 2. Cor. 8. 14. is expounded by Pontificians themselues, of Almesdeedes in this life; and the sence (accor­ding D to Cardinall Caietan Caietan. Sup. 2. Cor. 8.14. Ecce aequalitas, vos a­bundatis tempo­ralibus facultati­bus, Sancti in Hie­rusalem indigent, ad aequalitatē res reducitur, si vestra abundantia sucur­rit illorum indi­gentiae Dioni. Car­thus. ibid.) is, You Corinthians abound with tem­porall goods, the Saints of Hierusalem are in want: the matter will bee reduced to an equalitie, if your plentie supply their indigencie. But if with Hugo Carensis and Lyra, the latter part of the words should be expounded of Spiritualls, it belongeth to such spirituall gifts as are communicable from one member of the Church Militant in this life, to another, as instruction, exhortation, spe­ciall prayer, &c. and not to Satisfactions to be made to God by one for another, much lesse of applying such satisfactions of the deceased to the liuing, or to others deceased. The places, Col. 1. 24. 2. Cor. 12. 15. are forced by Romists to speake to purpose E which the Apostle intended not. S. Paul saith, Col. 1. 24. Ire­ioyce in my sufferings for you, and fill vp or accomplish, [...], those things which are behind or wanting, [...], AEstius. in Com. Ea quae reliqua sunt passionum, id est quae posterius adhuc restant per­soluenda. of the affli­ctions [Page 559] [...], of Christ, in my flesh, [...] his body, which is the A Church.

The first part of these words prooueth that S. Paul suffered for the Collossians: But because he might suffer for the confir­mation of their faith, or as an example of patience [...]. [...]. Col. 1. Pro vobis id est pro confir­matione vestri. Aug. d. Gen. ad. lit. li. 3. ca. 15. Et ex­empla Demonstranda sunt patientiae ad exempla aliorum., or by way of persecution, because he preached the Gospell to them Lira. Col. 1. Licet non predicauerit cis [...], predicauit tamen eis per suos Discipulos., and other Churches, it cannot be concluded, that hee suffered to make satisfaction for their sinnes.

Secondly, The next words conclude not Satisfaction: for B Christs Afflictions and Passions are of two kinds; Some Perso­nall, and in his owne flesh; Some, By Sympathie and compassion in his members Lira. ib. Pas­siones Christi du­pliciter dicuntur, vno modo in cor­pore proprio, in quo suftinuit fa­mem, sitim, & mortem, & fic ac­cipiendo, nihil e­rat ibi ad implen­dum: alio modo prout patitur in membris suis, qui sunt fideles, secun­dum quod dicit Act. 9. Saulê, Sau­lê, quid me perse­queris. Leo. serm. vlt. d. Pass. Domi­ni. Passio Domini inquit vsque ad finem perducitur mundi, & sicut in Sanctis suis ipse honoratur, ipse diligitur, & in pau­peribus ipse pascitur, ipse vestitur: ita in omnibus qui pro iustitia aduersa tollerant, ipse compatitur, &c. D Aug. d. Agon. Christi. ca. 7. Cruciatus corporis, malas animas miserabiliter affligit, bonos autem fortiter purgat. Anselm. in Coloss. 1.29. In carne Christi quam virgo peperit, nihil passionum deest, sed omnes in illa passiones sunt impletae: sed adhuc restat pars passionum eius in mea carne, quas quotidiè tollero pro vniuersali corpore eius quod est Ecclesia. Si enim ab eruditione fidelium cessarem, has passiones ab infide­libus non sustinerem.. The first are satisfactorie, the second are ex­emplarie, purgatiue, probatiue, or for the edifying of the Church Theodor Sup. Colos. ca. 1. Diuinus quoque Apostolus varias perpessiones pro ipso tollerauit, & lubenter sustinuit Gaudio enim inquit in passionibus pro vobis, sciebat enim vitam ex ijs procurari. Dixit autem se adimplere ea quae desunt afflictionum Christi, vt qui quod restat impleat & pro ijs perpessiones sustineat. Restabat autem vt predicaret gentibus & munificum solutis suppeditatorem ostenderet.. S. Paul supplyed not, or perfected not the first, Esa. 63.3. for then Christs sufferings vpon the Crosse, were imper­fect: but both S. Paul, and all other iust persons which patiently beare affliction, and indure the Crosse, supply and accomplish that which is yet wanting in Christ, as he is considered in a my­sticall C vnion to his Church. Christ saith to Saul, Act. 9.4. Saul, Saul, Why persecutest thou me: and v. 5. I am Iesus whom thou per­secutest. S. Augustine Aug. in Psal. 30. Conc. 1. Totus Christus, caput & corpus, caputille saluator corporis, qui iam a scendit in coelum, corpus autem Ecclesia quae laborat in terra. Hoc autem corpus nisi connexi­one Charitatis adhaereret capiti suo, vt vnus fieret ex capite & corpore, non de Coelo quendam perse­cutorem corripiens diceret: Saulê, Saulê, quid me persequeris? Idem. Psal. 140. Vos inquit Aposto­lus estis corpus Christi & membra. Si ergo illi caput, nos corpus, vnus homo loquitur, siue caput loquatur, siue membra, vnus Christus loquitur, & capitis est proprium loqui etiam in persona membro­rum. E and S. Gregorie Greg. Praef. Moral. ca. 11. Redemptor noster vnam se personam cum sancta Ecclesia quam assumpsit exhibuit. Theophil. Com. Coloss. 1. 24. Adeo diligit vos, vt tanquam non sufficiant priores pas­siones & afflictiones, post mortem etiam patiatur in meo corpore, nondum enim contentus est morte, sed adhuc inmumera facit. Non igitur seipsum [...] Paulus [...] dicit, sed monstrare volens quod Christus etiamnum pro ipsis curam gerat. say, That Christ and the Church are one mysticall Body. Therefore when the members suffer, the head suffers, and the afflictions of the members, are the afflictions of Christ, 2. Cor. 1. 5. 1. Cor. 12. 12.

[Page 560] It is also remarkeable, that not onely the Fathers, but the A maior part of Popish Doctors Aquin. 3. q. 48. Art. 5. ad. 2. Di­cendum quod [...] Sanctorum proficiunt Eccle­siae, non quidem per modum redēp­tionis, sed per mo­dum exempli, & [...] se­cundum illud, 2. Cor. Siue tribula­mur pro vestra ex­hortatione & sa­lute. Lira. in Colos. 1.24. [...]. ib. Adam Sasbot. in Epist. Paul ad Col. cap. 1. Christus non omnia perfe­cit in corpore suo: non enim sufficit passio ipsius ad cōuersionem gen­tium, si non prae­dicetur Euangeli­um: Quod ergo hic deest passionū Christi, ego adim­pleo monendo sci­licet, docēdo, prae­dicando, quod dū sedulo studeo fa­cere, multa patior dura & grauia, imo vincula & carceres. Illud (pro corpore eius) hunc habet sensum, vt corpus ipsius quod est Ecclesia perficiatur: hic videtur germanus esse sensus huius loci. B Iustinian. ibid. Pau­lutius. ibid. Guilliand. sup. Hebr cap. 10., expound this Scripture in such sort, that it serueth not at all to maintaine Papall Indul­gences. And Estius Estius. in Com. ibid. Hinc Theologi quidam putant, ostendi Sanctorum passiones fidelibus prodesse ad remissionem paenarum, quae vocatur indulgentia. Quae quidem Doctrina, Etsi Catholica & Apostolica sit, atque aliunde satis probetur: Ex hoc tamen Apostoli loco, nobis non videtur admodum solide statui posse. a moderne Pontifician saith, That whereas [...] of his part straine the Text of S. Paul, to prooue Satisfactions and Indulgences, himselfe is of mind, that the said Doctrine cannot effe­ctually be prooued by this place. The other place, 2. Cor. 12. 15. (I wil verie gladly spend and be spent for you:) or as the Rhe­mists translate, (I most gladly will bestow, and will my selfe moreouer be bestowed for your soules,) affoordeth no argu­ment for Satisfactions and Pardons. Caietan, Estius, Iustinian, B and other Popish expositors themselues, deliuer the sence of this Text in manner following Estius. Com. 2. Cor. 12.15. Equidem inquit, lubentissime non solum, vt pater quaecunque habeo vobis impendam, id est impendere paratus sum, tantum abest vt quae vestra sunt quaeram: verum etiam si sit opus, pro vita, & salute vestra, ipse expendar, hoc est, meipsum in D consumptionem, & mortem dare paratus, iuxta illud Saluatoris, bonus pastor animam suam dat pro ouibus suis.. S. Paul manifesteth his pa­ternall affection to the Corinthians, saying, I am readie not only as a Father, to bestow all that I haue vpon you (so farre am I from seeking any thing of yours) but also to spend my life for you. Now by what Art or Engine can Papists extort Pardons or Satisfa­ctions out of this Text? doth it follow, that if Saint Paul be readie to spend himselfe, life, and state, for the good of his flocke: therefore there is a rich stocke, and treasure of super­abundant Passions and Satisfactions laid vp by S. Paul, to bee C spent by the Corinthians at their need? Surely our Aduersarie intended rather to deride the world, than to giue men satisfa­ction, when he presented vs with such inconsequent stuffe.

But the Iesuit secondeth his former inference by a testimo­nie of Origen. I answer: Origen Origen. sup. Num. Hom. 10. Quomodo autem & filij eius aufe­runt peccata San­ctorum, id est A­postoli & Martyres, si poterimus ex Scripturis diuinis probare tentabimus. Audi primo Paulum dicen­tem, libenter enim (inquit) expendam & expendar pro animabus vestris. Pro ijs ergo quibus scribebat expendi se, & immolari dicit Apostolus. Hostia autem cum immolatur ad hoc immolatur, vt corum pro E quibus iugulatur peccata purgentur. De Martyribus artem scribit Iohannes Apostolus in Apoccalipsi, quiá animae eorum qui iugulati sunt propter nomen Domini Iesu adsistant Altari: qui autem adsistit Altari ostenditur fungi Sacerdotis officio. Sacerdotis autem officium est, pro populi Supplicare peccatis: vnde ego vereor ne, forte ex quo Martyres non fiunt, & hostiae Sanctorum non offeruntur pro peccatis nostris, pecca­torum nostrorum remissionem non mereamur. in the place obiected, spea­keth of purging sinne it selfe, by the passions of Martyres, and not of the temporall mulct, or paine of sinne onely. But the bloud of Martyres purgeth not sinne it selfe by way of con­digne [Page 561] Satisfaction (our Aduersaries being witnesses Zerula. d. In­dulg. lib. 1. cap. 11. Per Indulgentiam nō remittitur cul­pa peccati, nec [...] in temporalem, sed sola temporalis remittitur, tota vel pars. Aquin. Quodlib. 2. ar. 66. & 1.2. q. 87. ar. 3.4. & 4. sent. d. 46. q. 1. ar. 3. Caietan. Opusc. to. 2. q. 4.) but at A the vttermost, by way of Deprecation; now Deprecation and Satisfaction properly taken, are of diuers natures.

The place of S. Augustine Aug. super Psalm. 61 Sed de­bemus intelligere personam nostrā, personā Ecclesiae nostr̄ae, personam corporis Christi. Vnusenim homo cum capite & cor­pore suo Iesus Christus saluator corporis & mem­brorum corporis, duo in carne vna, & in voce vna, & in passione vna, & cum transierit in­iquitas in requie vna, passiones itaque Christi non in solo Christo, imò passiones Christi non nisi in Christo. Si enim Chri­stum intelligas caput & corpus passiones Christi non nisi in Christo. Si autem Christum intelligas solum C caput, passiones Christi, non nisi in solo Christo, imo in solo capite, vnde dicit quoddam membrum eius Pau­lus Apostolus, vt suppleam quae desunt pressurarum Christi in carne mea? Si ergo in membris Christi es quicunque homo, Quisquis haec audis, quisquis haec non audis, sed tamen audis si in membris Christi es quicquid pateris ab eis qui non sunt in membris Christi, deerat passionibus Christi. Ideo additur quia [...], mensura implens non supersundens. Tantum ergo pateris quantum ex passionibus suis inferendum erat vniuersae passioni Christi, qui passus est in capite nostro, & patitur in membris suis, id est, in nobis ipsis ad communem hauc quasi Rempublicam. Nam quisque pro modulo nostro exoluimus quod debemus & pro posse virium nostrarum quasi canonem passionum inferimus. is strained against his meaning, for this Father speaketh of all the members of Christ which suffer for their Masters cause: But in our Aduersaries Tenet, all that suffer for Christ haue not superabundant Satisfactions, but onely some. And this Father is so farre from maintaining B workes of Supererogation, as that he saith, Pro modulo nostro exoluimus quod debemus, & pro posse virium nostrarum, quasi cano­nem passionum inferimus, &c. According to our small measure we pay that which we are obliged vnto, and according to our power we cast in, as it were, the stint of our passions: but they which pay a stint, and render that whereunto of right they are obliged, haue not superaboundant Passions, or workes of Su­pererogation.

IESVIT.

This was the practise of the Primitiue Church, which at the petition of constant confessours in prison, did release D the penalties that sinners were inioined to performe, to sa­tisfie non onely the discipline of the Church, but also the wrath of God (after the remission of sinne) still continuing vnto the infliction of temporall paine, as appeareth by the testimonie of S. Cyprian. And that this relaxation of tem­porall Cypr. li. 3. ep. 15. paine was done by applying the abundant satis­faction of holy Confessours, and designed Martyres, vnto the poenitents that receiued indulgence, at their intercessi­ons, E appeares by Tertullian: For hee falling from the Church into the errours of Montanus, whereof one was, That for Christians sinning after Baptisme, there was no re­mission [Page 562] of sinne, refutes the Catholique custome of remit­ting A penalties vnto sinners for the merits of Martyres: speaking thus, Let it suffice the Martirs, that they haue [...]. lib. d. pu­dicitia cap. 22. cancelled and satisfied their owne sinnes. Jt is ingrati­tude or pride for one prodigally to cast abroad vpon o­thers that, which as a great benefit was bestowed vp­on him. And speaking vnto the Martir, saith, Jf thou bee a sinner, how can the oyle of thy lampe suffice both for thee and mee? By which haereticall impugnation ap­peares, that the Catholicke Doctrine then was, that men B might satisfie one for another, and that the abundant satisfactions of some, that suffered exceedingly as Mar­tirs, were applied for the Redemption of some others more remisse and negligent, not from eternall, but onely tempo­rall punishment.

ANSWER.

You are an vnfaithfull Relatour of the practise of the Pri­mitiue C Church, which was as followeth.

After foule and enormous knowne offences, committed by Christians, and especially, after denying the Faith, or Sacri­ficing to Idols, offendours were put to a grieuous and long Penance Concil. An­cyran. Concil. 1. Nicen. Burchard. lib. 19. Gratian. d. 28. c. Presbi­ter. & 35. q. vlt. & 24. q. 1. & 16. q. 5. &c.. It fell out sometimes, that there was iust rea­son, why the rigour of Penance should be mittigated, either in respect of the kinde of duresse imposed, or in regard of the length and continuance. Which fauour, the Bishops and Pa­stours of each Church (not the Romane onely) had autho­ritie D by the Canons, to grant as they saw iust cause Concil. An­cyran. can. 5. Con­cil. Nicen. 1. Can. 11.. This mitigation and relaxation of Penance, was called by the name of Pardon, and Indulgence Cassand. Consult. ar. 12. d. Indulg. [...] paenarum Canonicarum imminutio & relaxatio, in­dulgentia dicebatur., and in the same, there was no buying or selling, no reference to Purgatorie.

Secondly, Whereas you pretend, that Popes Pardons were in vse in the Primitiue Church, many of your owne part, controll your impudencie, to wit, Durand Durand. 4. d. 20. q 3. De indul­gentijs pauca dici possunt per certitudinem, quia nec Seriptura expresse de [...] loquitur, &c. Sancti etiam, Ambrosius, Hilarius, Augustinus, Hieronymus, minime de eis loquuntur., Antonine Antonin. Sum. Mo­ral. p. 1. tit. 10. cap. 3. De indulgentijs nil expressè habemus in Sacra Scriptura, &c. Nec etiam ex dictis Anti quorum Doctorum seu modernorum., E [Page 563] Maior Maior 4. d. 20. q. 2. Difficile est modum indulgen­tiarū fundare au­thenticè [...] Scrip­tura Sacra. In sig­num cuius, tres primi Doctores Ecclesiae, parum de isto modo Indul­gentiarum loquuti sunt., Roffensis Roffens. c. Lu­ther. ar. 18. Nemo iam dubitat Or­thodoxus an pur­gatorium sit, de quo tamen apud priscos, nulla vel quam rarissima [...] mentio. Sed & Graecis, ad hunc vsque diem, non est creditum purgato­rium esse, legat qui velit Graecorum veterum Commentarios, & nullum quantum opinor vel quam [...] de purgatorio sermonem inueniet; sed neque [...] omnes ac censim huius rei veri­tatem conceperunt. Cum ita que purgatorium tam [...] receptum vniuersae Ecclesiae fuerit, quisiam de Indulgentijs mirari potest quia in principio nascentis Ecclesiae nullus fuerit earum vsus.. Angelus [...] v. Indulg. n. 18. de Clauasio, Cassander Cassand. Consult. ar. 12. d. Indulg.. And A [...] Maire. 4. Dist. 19. Alph. Castro. c. [...]. li 8. v. Indulg. Inter omnes res de quibus in hoc opere [...] est, quàm minus apertè [...] literae prodiderunt, & de qua minus vetusti scriptores dixerint. Apud [...] nulla mentio Indulgentiarum. denyes, That the Church hath any Treasurie [...] of the merits of Christ, and of the Saints. The [...] is maintained by Angelus de Clauasio Sum. Angel. v. Indulg. n. 9. Ego teneo cum Franci. d. Mairo in tractatu de Indulgent. C quod cum [...] Sanctorum sunt vltra condignum remunerata à Deo & sic exhausta, quod so­lum dantur ex merito Christi & passionis eius, cuius minima [...] vel sudoris sufficeret ad expia­tionem omnium peccatorum quae vnquam fuerunt perpetrata aut perpetrabuntur.. Cardinall [...] saith, That indulgences are granted onely for pennance imposed by the Church, and so according to this opinion, they release people, onely of saying a certaine number of [...], or from fasting certaine houres, or from bestowing a few pence on the poore [...]. Medin. d. Indulg. ca. 14. Caietanus dixit Indulgentias dari tantam de impositis poenitentijs Caiet. Opusc. to. 1. tr. 8. q. 1. Ex hac opinione sequitur quod qui ab Hispania imo ab altero orbe Romam aut Hierosolymam indul­gentiae plenariae lucrandae gratia profisiscatur non aliud habebit quam non dicendi tricies [...] Angelicam, aut nummum tribuendi pauperibus libertatem, ita vt iam priori illi obligationi non astringatur, videmus hac illius opinione non minus Sacras indulgentias quibus nunc Ecclesia vtitur, risui Haeretico­rum exponi, quam si omnino earum conferendarum potestas apertè negaretur.. And it was a common opinion in the dayes of Albertus Albert. 4. d. 20. Ar. 17., and Henricus de [...] Gand. Quodlibet. 15. Altisiodor. Sum. li. 4. d. Relap dicunt quidam quod relaxatio non valet quantum Ecclesia promittit: sed facit vt excitentur fideles ad dandum, & decipit eos Ecclesia., that Popes B Pardons were onely pious Fraudes. What indulgence is it then for [...] Pontificians to Father this Popish Cosenage vpon the holy Apostles and Primitiue Church?

Thirdly, I haue perused the place of S. Cyprian Cypr. Epist. 15. li. 3., obiected by the Aduersarie, and two other Epistles Li. 3. 16. & 18. Epist. of the like argu­ment, D wherein I finde that the Martyrs intreated the Church for mitigation of Paenance imposed vpon some offenders: but neither doe the Martyrs themselues affirme, That they had made Satisfaction for the temporall paine of sinne; neither did S. Cyprian, grant any other indulgence, than from the paenance inioyned by the Canons of the Church, in manner before re­hearsed.

But if the Iesuit will obtaine his purpose, he must prooue out of Antiquitie, that the Church in those dayes maintained a E common treasure of Satisfactions, & an application of the same, to people defunct, whose soules were frying in Purgatorie [...]. in 4. d. 21. q. 1. ar. 3. [...]. Duran. Caietan, &c. Fatentur indulgentiarum vsum esse rem nouam quae [...], Augusti­ni, [...], &c. aut id genus diuorum patrum connitatur, sed solum pontificum 400. retroannis., [Page 564] and that the Roman Pope was the onely or principall Key­bearer, A and Barterer of this Treasurie.

I reade [...]. [...]. Eccles. [...]. Sequuntur [...] orationes, & pri­mò oratio Sancti [...] de sin­gulis articulis pas­sionis Domini, quam Anastasius [...], dans [...] dicenti­bus [...] dies indulgentia­rum. Jbid. Inno­centius Papa [...], concessit [...] hanc o­rationem sequen­tem denotè [...] milia dienum [...]. Auevulnus lateris nostri [...], &c. Ibid. [...] orati­onem sequentem deuotè dixcrit [...] vndecima milia annorum Indulgentiarum. Et per tot dies videbit beatam virginem Mariam, antè diem exitus sui, per quot annos [...]. Aue Domina Sancta Maria mater Dei Regina coeli, porta Paradisi, Domina [...] Lux sempiterna imperatrix inferni: singularis & pura tu es virgo tu concepisti Iesum Christum sine [...]: tu peperisti Creatorem Redemptorem ac Saluatorem mundi in quo non dubito, libera meab om­nibus malis: & ora pro peccatis meis. Gerson. to. 2. d. Indulg. Consid. 10. Indulgentiarum concessio per tot mi­lia [...] dierum sed & annorum videtur difficulter sanabilis post remissionem aeternae poenae & commu­tationem in temporalem. Constat [...] quod nec homo singularis in hac vita potest, aut debet ad tot annos [...] poenitentiam agere cum non victurus sit per millessimam partem tot annorum & nemo ad impos­sibile obligatur: constat [...] quod dum mundus finem habebit cessabit purgatorium & ex consequenti dies poenarum suarum. of certaine Popes, that they granted pardons of [...] hundred dayes, and of foure thousand dayes, and of eleuen thou­sand yeares, to all people which should rehearse S. [...] his prayer, and the [...] Maria, and one other Prayer to the bles­sed Virgin. Our Aduersarie is reputed learned by his owne part, and perhaps he hath the gift of working wonders: I intreat him out of his owne vast reading, or else from Father [...] his storehouse, to parallell this Romish liberall practise with some historie out of Antiquitie [...]. 4. d. 21. q. 2. ar. 1. [...] verum habet quod indulgentiae valeant D ad remissionem poenarum purgatorij? Fateor [...] cum varie de hoc [...] Doctores nullibi quod plenesa­tisfaciat me legisse.. And if he please further to demon­strate B that the antient Church had taxes Taxa. Sacrae poenitentiariae. [...]. Sarisbur. Hanc orationem edidit Sixtus. pa. 4. & Concessit [...] dicentibus coram imagine B. Mariae Virginis in sole 40000. annorū Indulgentiarum. and [...] for summes of money vpon particular crimes, to be solued to the Publicans of the Ecclesiasticall Roman Tribute, in lieu of Pardons, or for absolution, he shall by disclosing to the world in what old Wall or Vault such vncouth Iewels are to be found, highly aduance the reputation of his Roman pennance and pardons; and for my part he shall haue leaue to squeese from his spirituall children what money he can, vnder that title: whereas in the meane time he and his fellowes by false pretence of Antiquitie, doe but cheate their simple Lay-Catholikes of their coyne, whereof no C small summes are transported out of the Kingdome by such like glosses and trickes.

Fourthly, for want of better testimonie, the Obiector would prooue the antient vse of Pardons, out of lapsed Tertullian: for if this man being fallen from the Church, opposed them, then they were in vse in that age. I answer, the Aduersary might haue learned of Pamelius Pammel. An­not. in Tertull. d. pudicitia. ca. 22. nu. 192,, That the Indulgences which Ter­tullian oposed, were the same whereof Cyprian speaketh, Epist. 10, 11, 12. to wit, relaxation of Canonicall censures, and pae­nance E to Adulterers Tertul. ib. Cum [...] & fornicatoribus à Martyre expostu­las veniam., and other notorious sinnes, vpon the re­quest of Martyrs being in prison, and yet aliue. Now it seemed to this Father to be vnlawfull, both that the Martyrs should be Intreatours, and that the Church should graunt Absoluti­on [Page 565] Delicti, culpae, Of the sinne, crime, and fault it selfe, and not onely of the temporall punish­ment. tosuch persons, or vse relaxation of censures, imposed by the A discipline of those times. And it is to be obserued, that this Fa­ther speaketh of liuing Martyrs, and not of Martyrs defunct, and of releasing censures, and forgiuing faults in this world one­ly, and not in Purgatorie. But the Aduersarie is so farre from being able to prooue Popes pardons in Tertullians dayes, that he cannot prooue the same to haue had any being in the dayes of Peter Lombard, or Hugo Victor Vide Soto 4. d. 21. q. 1. ar. 3. Ma­gister autem sen­tentiarum, &c. Neque Hugo eius coaetaneus qui de Sacramentis scripsit de illis meminit. Sunt qui arbitren­tur indulgentiarum concessiones caepisse à tempore Gregorij. m. de hoc autem nulla extat historia, &c. Sub [...] ergo innocentij. 3. [...], Alexandri, Alberti, & S. Thomae, de indulgentijs scribere orsi sunt. [...]. to. 4. disp. 53. sect. 1. n. 5.. B

IESVIT.

I shall not need particularly to refell the vulgar obie­ctions against this Doctrine: which all proceed vpon mi­staking, and impugne what we neuer dreamed of. They prooue that Christ onely dyed for the world, and redeemed Mankind, and not any Saint; who doubts therof? That we are sanctifyed and washed from the staine of sinne by the C blood of the Lambe, not of any Saint; We confesse it. They bring the testimonies of S. Leo, and of S. Augustine, That the Saints receiued Crownes of God, gaue not Crownes vnto others, but onely Christ; we neuer did nor will deny it. That onely in Christ we dye to sinne, and are raysed againe soule and body vnto eternall life; we neuer taught the contrarie: for the Satisfactions of Saints haue not vertue to redeeme the world, nor to satisfie for the guilt D of sinne, nor to take men out of the power of darkenesse, nor to iustifie soules by infusion of grace, nor to purchase for men crownes of Glorie, nor to rayse men from life to death; but only shew, they are auaileable vnto one transito­ry effect, which men might (were they feruent) obtaine by their owne industrie, ioyned with diuine grace, to wit, the Remission of temporall paine; which vertue also comes from the merits of Christ, and his most pretious blood, in, E and by the Satisfactions of Saints applyed to worke the aforesaid temporall releasement; from which temporall seruitude, the children of God may through his gratious [Page 566] assistance by good workes redeeme themselues, or by Satis­factions A of their fellow Citizens and Saints be redeemed: Though this temporarie Redemption compared with the Redemption of Christ, deserue not that Tytle.

ANSWER.

It is an errour to ascribe any effect to the operations of men, which is proper to the death of Christ: But to make Satisfacti­on to diuine Iustice for any punishment of sinne, eternall or tem­porall, B is an effect proper to the death of Christ. For the holy Scripture teacheth expresly, that all spirituall, redemption is immediately wrought by the bloud of Christ, Heb. 1. 3. When he had by himselfe, [...], purged our sinnes, Col. 2. 15. tri­umphing ouer them in himselfe, [...]. And whereas our Ad­uersaries restraine these and the like places to the staine and eternall guilt of sinne, the Apostle, Col. 2. 14. affirmeth, That Christ blotted out ( [...]) the hand writing of decrees (con­tayned in the law [...]. Sup. Coloss. 2. De legc siquidem Moy si loquitur, quae lex mandatorum, de­cretorum, & facto­rum appellatur. Adam. Sasbot. ibid. Legemautē Moysi siue Decalogum, Chirographū ap­pellauit, quod ac­cusaret & contestaretur aduersus nos. Eph. 2.15. Lex enim iudicabat nosreos, dum non praestabamus quod precipiebatur, vnde etiam dicit Chirographum ipsum fuisse contrarium nobis. Hoc Chirographum deleuit Christus, quia ipsius beneficio iam amplius non tenemur lege. AEstius. ibid. vult enim docere Apostolus, legem veterem per Christum abolitam esse, totamque eius obligationem cessare, introducta lege Christi.) that was against vs, and tooke it out of the way, nailing it to his Crosse (and that by himselfe, Heb. 1.3. Col. 2.15.) but the temporarie punishment of sinne, is contayned C within the latitude of the Law, Leuit. 26.14. Deut. 28.15, &c. Therefore Christ Iesus our Sauiour, immediately and by him­selfe, and not mediately by the passions of Saints, wiped out, and remooued out of the way the malediction of temporarie punishment, as well as the guilt of eternall.

When Daniel himselfe, one of the most holy Prophets, pray­ed D for the remission of his owne sinnes, and of the transgressi­ons of his people, and made supplication to God for remission of temporall paines and plagues, he offereth not his owne me­rits, or Satisfaction, but saith, Dan. 9.7. Oh Lord, righteousnesse belongeth vnto thee, but vnto vs confusion of face. v. 9. To the Lord our God belongeth mercy and forgiuenesse, though we haue rebelled against thee: and v. 18. O my God, encline thine eare and heare, open thine eyes and behold our desolations, &c. for we doe not present our E supplications before thee for our owne righteousnesse, but for thy great mercies. Three things are remarkeable in this Scripture.

First, Daniell was a sanctified person, and a Prophet, one of those which, according to our Aduersaries Tenet, communi­cates Satisfactions to fill vp the Churches Treasurie.

[Page 567] Secondly, he prayeth to God, not onely for the remission A of the eternall guilt of sinne, but also for the pardon and release of temporarie punishment.

Thirdly, he presenteth not his owne Satisfactions, neither yet the superabundant Passions of any other of the Patriarchs or Prophets, but he resteth wholy vpon the free mercy of God, and the future satisfaction of the Messiah to come. Therefore I conclude, that they which conioyne the passions of Saints with the sufferings of Christ to make condigne Satisfaction for the temporarie punishment of sinne, are iniurious to the All-suffi­cient B Passion of Christ, and attribute that vertue to the actions of men, which is proper to the Sacrifice of the Sonne of God.

Now if the Aduersarie in his answer relye vpon the distin­ction of eternall and temporall paine, affirming that Christ alone, and by himselfe hath fully satisfied the iustice of God for the first, but not for the latter Greg. Val. O­pusc. li. d. Satisfac. ca. 3. Cogitandum est Christum non solum suam, sed etiam nostram si­mul satisfactionē aeterno patri ac­ceptandam obtu­lisse, vt ex vi etiam satisfactionis no­ftrae, debitum il­lud, quod ad poenam quidētemporalem attinet solueretur.: he must remember, That it is not sufficient in a matter of such consequence, to affirme Nugnus. Addit. in 3. p. Th. q. 20. ar. 3. dif. 1. Quod autem fuerit diuina institutio, licet non possit, manifeste probari, quia non constat ex sacris literis, neque ex concilijs, tamen loca supra adducta, precipuè Pij quinti, sufficienter illud probant., but he must confirme, by diuine Testimonie, the veritie of his answer. And if the former Principles and the arguments dedu­ced from them, when they are propounded in a due forme, con­clude C not his assertion, then his distinction is a begging of the question, and not a solution of the Obiection.

Lastly, if the Iesuit will be so rigide, as to admit no argu­ment on our part which may receiue any colourable answer, I must require him (likewise) to confirme his owne positions, at leastwise with probable reasons, and not pester his papers with Illations ridiculous to children. But among other things, I in­treate D him to deliuer so much as one probable Argument in due forme (I will not require a demonstration) proouing, that the Roman Bishop, or any Prelate vnder him, haue power ouer soules in Purgatorie Bzouius. An­nal. Tom. 14. An­no. 1300. n. 4. In­super publicè cla­mabant, quia di­ctorum Apostolo­rum (Petri & Pau­li) meritis, Omnes animae in Purgatorio, non solum à poenis suissent liberatae, sed etiam aeternam quoque E gloriam consecutae.: for if his Monarchy be onely ouer the Church Militant Onus. Eccles. ca. 15. Papa non mortuorum sed viuentium terrestris est Deus. Ga­briel. in Can. Miss. lect. 57. Dicit Sanctus Bonauentura, si quis contendat vicarium Iesu Christi, habere iudiciariam potestatem super eos qui sunt in Purgatorio, non est ei multum resistendum, dummodo hoc di­ctet ratio vel authoritas manifesta. Rubeo. 4 d. 19. q. 2. Indulgentiae non proficiunt nec dari possunt existenti­bus in Purgatorio, &c. quia existentes in Purgatorio, non sunt de foro Papae. Gerson. to. 4. ser. 2. d. Defunct. q. 9., and the Church Militant is onely vpon earth, by what authoriy doth the Roman Bishop intermeddle with soules in Purgatorie? Also how doth his holynesse, or his Emissaries, the Iesuits and Fryars, know which soules are in Pur­gatorie [Page 568] gatorie, and how long they continue in the same, and the time, A and season, when it is expedient to apply suffrages and indul­gences to them.

d Viguer. instit. cap. 16. §. 6. vers. 22. Videtur dicendum quod valet ad totannos, ad quot secundum diuinam ordinationem, pro peccatis preteritis, haberet sustinere in Purgatorio, si ante Indulgentiae consecutionem, in gratia decessisset. Petud. 4. d. 20. q. 4. n. 18. Negas. [...]. to. 4. disp. 50. sect. 5. n. 11. 12. Saepè conceduntur mille vel decem mille anni Indulgentiae cum tamen poenae Purgatorij ordinariè non sint tanto tempore duraturae. Est igitur communis sententia, diem vel annum in huiusmodi Indulgentijs proxime significare, durationem poenitentialis satisfactionis in hac vita exhibitae pro peccatis, per Indulgentiam autem remitti non solum satisfactionem poenitentialem, sed tantam poenam Purgatorij, quanta per poenitentiam vnius diei vel anni remitteretur. [...] 4. d. 21. q. 2. ar. 1. Cordube d. Indulg. q. 11. [...]. d. Sacram. Disp. 6. q. 1. punct. 2. pa. 661. [...]. sup. Decret. dist. 1. d. poenit. in Leuitico. q. 24. n. 25. 26. 27. &c. Dominicus Soto, and Thomas Zerula say, That soules continue not in Purgatorie, ten or twentie yeeres, and yet the Pope gran­teth Pardons for many thousands of yeeres Zerula. d. In­dulg. l. 1. c. 21. q. 8. Octauo quaeritur quanto tempore a­nima potest stare in Purgatorio? Resp. breuiter ex Sot. loc. cit. dist. 21. q. 2. ar. 1. col. 4. & dist. 19. q. 2. ar. 2. In fine: vbi ait ani­mam non detineri in Purgatorio spa­tio viginti imo nec decem annorum. Aureol. 4. d. 20. ar. 1. Also, by what experience or testimonie doe Papists vnderstand the state of soules in Purgatorie, the qualitie of their paine Reade before in the Margen, pag. 564. Rubeo 4. d. 19. q. 1. Aliquando pro vno denario vel obolo, quinquaginta vel cen­tum anni de Indulgentia conceduntur., their ingresse and egresse from that place of torment, or the meanes to apply remedie to them? Now let them answere what they please touching the difference of the yeeres of Penance in this life, B with the measure of Purgatorie paines Jac. d. Graph. Append. d. Indulg. cap. 1. n. 24. Poeua Pur­gatorij etsi aeterna non sit, miro tamen modo est grauis, excedit enim omnem poenam quam vnusquisque vnquam passus est in hac vita: vnde nunquam in carne inuenta est tanta poena licet mirabilia pasci sint Mar­tyres C tormenta, &c., or concerning any of the former assertions, and withall, let them be intreated to confirme their Tenet with any probable Argument, and wee shall thinke they are lesse partiall, when they admit no proofe as sufficient on our part, which can be euaded by any straine of wit.

THE NINTH POINT. A THE OPINION OF B DEPOSING KINGS, AND giuing away of their Kingdomes by Papall power, whether directly or indirectly.

IESVIT. C

THe Question proposed in the ninth place, being a Controuersie be­tweene two powers, both (each in his kind) Soueraigne and Supreame; both instituted and appointed of God; both necessarie for the preseruation of Reli­gion, and gouernment of the Christian world; both Sacred, Venerable, Honoured, and reuerenced of me, in the inmost D affections of my soule: for me to vndertake the discussion thereof betweene them, were to put my selfe into imminent danger of incurring their offence, whose fauour J desire and esteeme aboue all worldly blessings.

ANSVVER.

IN your entrance into this ninth E Question, you deliuer these Particulars: First, That the question is, concerning two Powers, in their seuerall kinds supreame. Secondly, Both these Powers, (Regall, and Papall) are vnfainedly honoured by you.

[Page 570] Thirdly, You professe your owne vnwillingnesse to discusse A this question, because of offence.

To the first I answer, That Papall iurisdiction is not su­preame in Spirituals, by Diuine institution; whereas regall is by diuine, naturall, and ciuill, in things ciuill and temporall. Gre­gorie Greg. li. 4. ep. 60. Nullus praede­cessorum meorum Pontificū Roma­norum vniuersalis Episcopi nomen sibi assūpsit, quod si assump erit Ty­phum esse dico ar­rogantiae, vocabu­lum superbum no­uum, pompaticū, peruersum, stultū, temerarium, su­perstitiosum, pro­phanum, impium, sceleratum, nomē singularitatis, no­men erroris, no­men Hypocriseos, nomen vanitatis, nomen blasphe­miae, eumquè qui se appellauerit, aut appellari deside­rauerit illo arro­gantissimo voca­bulo, in elatione sua Antichristum praecurrere, illius­què quietam & gratam vsurpati­onem, fidei vni­uersalis Ecclesiae calamitatem esse. Read also lib. 4. ep. 32.36. 37. 38. 39. & lib. 6 ep. 24.30. 37. & li. 7. ep. 3. Paul. Cararia. sum. Canon & Mor. q. 3. ar. 7. p. 2. n. 40. Ex nimia humilitate se vniuersalem Papam negat (Gregorius.) the Great (a Roman Pope) saith as followeth: None of the Romane Bishops my predecessours assumed to himselfe the name of Vniuersall Bishop: and if any man else assume the same, I say, It is a swelling of arrogancie, a prowd, nouell, pompous, peruerse, temerari­ous, superstitious, prophane, and impious title, A name of Singularitie, a title of Errour, a word of Vanitie, and Blasphemie: and whosoeuer B taketh vpon him, or desireth this arrogant title, by this exalting him­selfe, he is a forerunner of Antichrist; and if he be permitted to vsurpe the same, it will prooue the bane of the Faith of the vniuersall Church. Also if the Roman Monarchie were of Diuine institution, how could an Oecumenicall Councell Con­cil. Chalced. Act. 16. (one of those foure which Pope Gregorie himselfe honoured as the foure Euangelists Greg. lib. 1. ep. 24. Sicut sancta Euangelij quatuor Libros, sic quatuor [...] suscipere, & venerari me fateor.) appoint equall dignitie, iurisdiction, and priuiledges to the Episcopall See of Constantinople, and to the See of Rome? Againe, other Bishops in auntient time, stile the Romane by the name of Brother, Colleague, fellow Priest, fellow Bishop Concil. to. 1 Surij, pa. 601.603.604. Cyprian. ep. 67. & 72. Greg. in [...]. saepissimè., C &c. They resist him, and controll his Actions Euseb. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 23. Socrat. li. 5. ca. 21. [...]. ap. Cyprian. ep. 75. Onus Ecclesiae, cap. 19. n. 3. Si Christus super alios Apostolos Petrum, & fortè eiusdem Petri successores super alios Sacerdotes praeposuerit quemadmodum proditur in Dialogo Catha Senen. Tamen hoc fecit ob Petri Praecipuam [...] humilitatem, & charitatem, Ideo successoribus Pontificibus nisi essent eiusmodi, talen Praeeminentiam non praesumitur attribuisse, neque super eos aèdificasse suam Ecclesiam vniuersalem, quae simpliciter pendet à Christo, qui est angularis lapis, & fundamentum ipsius Ecclesiae.. And that which is principally to be considered: It appeareth not by di­uine Reuelation, that our Sauiour, or his Apostles, granted any Monarchie to the Romane Pope, or that he is the onely Suc­cessour of S. Peter, or that S. Peters authoritie and priuiledges are deuolued vpon the Romane Bishops onely. Yea it is not in­fallible, that S. Peter himselfe was a Monarch, Luc. 22.24. for in the whole diuine Historie, no Monarchicall actions of his are reported: He is sent vpon a message by other Apostles Gerson. d. potest. Eccles. Lect. 11. Apostoli miserunt in Samariam Petrum & Iohannem, tanquam subditos Ecclesiae., Acts 8.14: he giues the right hand of fellowship to S. Paul and Bar­nabas, D Gal. 2. 9: and many of the Fathers say, the rest of the Apostles were his Compeeres Cypr. d. vnit Ec­cles. E Hoc erant vtique & caeteri Apostoli, quod fuit [...], pari consortio praediti, & honoris & potestatis. Chrys. sup. Gal. 1. (Paulus) honore par illi erat. Hieron. epist. ad Euagrium..

Secondly, Your protestation, that you honour Papall and regall dignitie, must be vnderstood Iesuitically, with mentall [Page 571] limitation, to wit, that you hononr the Pope as an earthly God, A yea so farre, as that if he lead you to Hell, you are readie to follow him Dist. 40. ca. Si Papa.. But you honor Kings as the Popes vassals Math. Paris. Chron. in Henrico 3. pa 844. Nonne Rex Anglorū no­ster est vassallus., or in a subordination to the Pope, and so farre onely as the Pope Aug. Triump. Sum. d. Eccles. p. 1. q. 1. ar. 1. Omnis potestas Impera­torum & Regum est subdelegata re­spectu potestatis Papae. Naucler. Generat. 37. Consurgit ex aduerso blandiens adulatio susurrans ô quanta est sublimitas Ecclesiasticae pote­statis. Nam sicut Christo collata est omnis potestas in coelo & in terra, ità Christus omnem potestatem dedit successoribus suis. Vndè nec Constantinus quicquam dedit Syluestro Papae quod non esset prius su­um, sed reddidit iniuste detentum Porrò sicut non est potestas nisi à Deo, sic nee aliqua potestas Imperialis aut Regalis haberi potest, nisi à Dei Vicario, in cuius femore scriptum est, Rex Regum, Dominus Domi­nantium. Ipse est Monarcha supremus nedum in spiritualibus sed in temporalibus, à quo alij Reges & Principes immediatè suam accipiunt Dominationem, & solum mediate à Deo. will licence you. And if you speake plainely, and from your heart, concerning your loyaltie and dutifull respect towards the King, how commeth it to passe that Roman Priests and Iesuits haue had their singer in euerie treason intended against his Maiestie, yea formerly against Queene Elizabeth, and the state? and wherefore doe you your selfe decline the Oath of Allegeance, and persecute some of your owne part, because B they persuade and maintaine the lawfulnesse of this Oath?

Thirdly, If you be vnwilling (for feare of afterclaps) to dis­pute, or deliuer your iudgement concerning this question, this C feare of danger becommeth not a Diuine of resolution. And Bernard. ep. 34. S. Bernards rule is, Melius est vt scandalum oriatur, quam vt veritas relinquatur, It is better that scandall happen, than that Veritie be forsaken, which is most to be obserued in matter of Faith: such as this is made by your faction, and tending (by the deny­ing thereof) to the ruine of soules, as yee pretend.

IESVIT.

But seeing that those of our Societie are odiously tra­duced, D as maintainers of Doctrine extolling the Popes au­thoritie, to the preiudice of Princes, more than any other Diuines of the Roman Religion; J sinceerely (in the sight of Almightie God) protest vnto your Maiestie, that I neuer knew any Iesuit, who was permitted, either by word or writing, to hold any singular opinion in this point, but such as are ordinarily held by other Diuines secular and religious. E

ANSWER.

There be three opinions maintained respectiuely by Ro­man Diuines, concerning the present question.

[Page 572] 1. The first is negatiue, to wit, the Pope (by vertue of his A office) hath not any power or authoritie to depose Princes, or to dispose of their crownes or liues, for any cause, crime, end, or good, whatsoeuer Read the B. of Rochester, d. potest. Papae, ca. 8. Qui multos citat Authores..

2. The second is affirmatiue Marta d. Iu­risdict part 1. cap. 19. n. 7. [...]. d. Cath. Iustit. tit. 46. n. 73. 74. 75. [...]. d. Sig. Eccle. lib. 17. ca. 4. Baron. Annal. to. 11. Anno 1026. n. 26. & Anno 1027. n. 51. Sander. d. Monarch. lib. 2. ca. 4. [...]. Pontif. Rom. ca. 46 pa. 621. Carerius. d. Rom. Pontif. li. 2 ca. 17. Paulus Cararia. Sum. Mor. & Can. q. 3. ar. 7. p. 2. n. 10. B, That the Romane Pope hath a direct power to depose and vnstate them: and that Romish Catholiques are obliged to assist the Pope in the execution of his sentence of decrowning Princes, and transla­ting their crownes.

3. The third is pendulous, with shew of Limitation, and Mitigation, to wit, The Pope hath an indirect Bellar. d. Pon­tif. li. 5. ca. 1678. Gretsar. def. Bellar. d. Pontif. Driedo. d. li. Christ li. 2. ca. 2. Victoria. d. potest. Eccle. q. 2. Caietan. Apol. ca. 13. ad. 6. Soto. 4. dist. 25. q. 2. ar. 1. Turrecrem. sum. li. 2. cap. 113. Pighius Apol. cap. 13. Power, limitted and circumscribed by many Cautions, and Prouisoes, in deposing Princes, &c.

The first Tenet is Orthodoxall, grounded vpon holy Scrip­ture, and the Testimonie of the Primitiue Fathers Policarp. ap. Euseb. Hist. lib. 4. cap. 15. Tertull. c. Scap. cap. 2. & d. Idol. cap. 15. & Apol. cap. 30. &c. Marc. lib. 1. Orig. lib. 9. Ep. ad Rom. cap. 13. Chrysost. in Ep. ad Rom. Ser. 23. Optat. Mileuit. c. Parmen. lib. 3. Ambros. Apol. Dauid. cap. 10. & 16. Aug. Ep. 166. & sup. Psal. 124. & Expos. Ep. ad Rom. Greg. Rom. lib. 3. Ep. 61. & 64. [...]. Expof Pelus. lib. 1. Ep. 48. Damian. lib. 4. ep. 9. Concil. Toletan. 4. Otho Frising. Chron. lib. 6. c. 35. Gerson. d. Potest. Eccles. Lect. 11. Occham, Aliaco, [...]. Maier. Waldensis, Doctores Parisienses., and the consent of many famous Doctors in all Ages, whose mouthes C the malice and tyrannie of Popes was neuer able to stop; but they freely and successiuely, to this Age, haue propugned this Diuine Veritie.

The second Opinion is falsely fathered vpon Pope Zacharie the first Carerius. d. Pot Rom. pont. li. 2. ca. 3. Boskier. Le­gat. Apostol Con 14. pa. 35. Grtaian. Caus. 15. q. 6. cap. Arius. Zacharius Regem Francorum non tam pro suis iniquitatibus quam pro [...] quod [...] potestati erat inutilis à regno deposuit., but indeed no elder than Pope Gregorie the se­uenth, a Brand of Hell; and it was ripened by many of his D Successors, and fomented by sundrie Parasites and Assassines of Rome, and is by many Modernes defended Marta. Simancha. Baronius. Tho. Bosius. Fanc. Bosius. Carerius. Paulus Cararia..

The third Opinion, maintained by Bellarmine, may seeme (for manner of speaking) to be more moderate than the for­mer, but in weight and consequence, it is equally false, and pernitious; for it hath the same effects, yeelding Authoritie E to Popes, to depose Princes, when the same appeareth to them­selues reasonable, and for the benefit of the Roman Cause Bellarm. ibid. cap. 6. Dummodo non obsint fini spirituali, aut non sint necessaria ad eum consequen­dum, si autem tale quid accidat, spiritualis potestas potest aut dobet coercere temporalem omni ratione ac via quae ad id necessa­ria videbitur. Idem, lib. contra Barclaium, pag. 37.40.48.49.149.177.; [Page 573] it armeth subiects to Rebellion, and enemies to mischiefe; and A it prouideth, that Regall Maiestie shall depend vpon Papall discretion and deuotion Bellar. d. Rom. Pontif. lib. 5. ca. 6. Quantum ad personas non potest Papa, vt Papa ordinariè temporales Principes deponere, etiam iusta de causa, eo modo quo deponit Episcopos, id est tanquam ordinarius Iudex, tamen potest mutare regna & vni auferre, atque alteri conferre tanquam summus Princeps Spiritualis, si id necessarium sit ad animarum sa­lutem. Idem, cap. 7. Quod si Christiani olim non deposuerunt Neronem, & Dioclesianum & Iulianum A­postatum, ac [...] Arianum, & similes, id fuit quie de erant vires temporales Christianis. Nam quod alioqui jure potuissent id facere patet ex Apostolo, 1. Cor. 6..

But the Iesuit, our Aduersarie, washeth his hands (like Pilate, B Matth. 27. 24.) pretending, That he and his fellowes (good men) are cleare from shedding Royall Bloud, or treading Scep­ters in the myre; hee neuer knew any Iesuit, who was permit­ted either by word or writing, to hold any singular Opinion in this Point. [Page 574] approoue and receiue the Oath of Allegeance, and wee shall be A more readie to credit Protestations, concerning their fidelitie to his Royall Maiestie, and the State.

IESVIT.

For my owne particular, as I reuerence the Pope as Christ his Vicar on earth, yet I doe vtterly disclaime from enlarging his power ouer the temporalties of Prin­ces, by any singular opinions of mine, or more than defi­nitions B of Councells, and consent of Diuines, doth force me to hold.

Bellar. c. Barc­laium, enumerat Synodos, Bene­uentanum sub Vi­ctore 3. Placenti­num sub Vrbano 2. Romanum sub Paschali 2. Co­loniense sub Ge­lasio 2. Rhemen­se sub Calixto 2. Lateranense sub Innocentio 3. &c., and Popish Diuines, are not farre to seeke, which A haue exalted the Popes Temporall Soueraigntie as farre ouer Princes, as Heauen is aboue the Earth Extra. d. Major. & Obed. ca. vnam Sanctam.. And therefore say­ing, That you hold no singular Opinions, more than Definitions, and consent of Diuines, you leaue a libertie to your selfe, to close in your Opinion, with Pope Hildebrand Greg. 7. lib. 1. Ep. 63. Ap. Baron. Annal. to. 11. B anno 1074. nu. 56. Quem Dominus Iesus Christus Rex gloriae, Principem super regna mundi constituit. Idem, lib. 2. Ep. 13. Quod si verum est, qualiter gratiam Beati Petri, aut nostram Beneuolentiam sperare debeas, tu ipse, si justitiam vis attendere non ignoras, videlicet, te non aliter eam habiturum, nec sine Apo­stolica animaduersione diu regnaturum, nisi Sceptrum Regni quod tenes, correcto errore tuo, Apostolicae, non Regiae Majestatis beneficium recognoscas. Idem, lib. 4. Ep 23. Alteri autem, qui nostrae jussioni hu­militer paruerit, & Obedientiam vniuersali Matri, sicut decet Christianum Regem exhibuerit, Conuocato Concilio omnium Clericorum & Laicorum, quos aduocare poteritis, Concilium & Adjutorium in omni­bus Praebete, & in Regia Dignitate per Authoritatem Beatorum Apostolorum Petri & Pauli nostra vice confirmate, omnibusque Episcopis, Abbatibus, Clericis, & Laicis, in omni regno habitantibus, vt sibi fideliter & sicut oportet Regi obediant & deserunant, ex parte Omnipotentis [...]., Pope Boniface Bonifac. Ap. Platinam, in vita eius. the eight, and with Baronius Baron. Annal. to. 11 anno 1075. n. 2. In quos rursus audiat ipse vocem Clamantis, Surge & occide & manduca, Act. 10. Ibidem, anno 1089. n. 11. ex Iuo. part. 10. cap. 54. Non eos Homicidas arbitramur, qui aduersus excommunicatos Zelo Catholicae Matris ardentes, eorum quoslibet trucidasse contigerit., and Bosius Bosius, d. Sig. Ecclesiae, lib. 17. cap. 4. In quo elucescit Authoritas Papae, qui C potest justis de causis, vel sine culpa, ab alijs in alios jura maxima, qualia sunt imperia summa, Decreto suo transferre. Atque ita quatuor causas habemus, ex quibus Papa & Episcopi, possunt regna, illis quidem au­ferre, his vero adjudicare, quarum prima est in scelere aliquo admisso posito, quae multis exemplis illustrari potest. Secunda est in socordia. Duae postremae respiciunt aetatem ad regendum ineptam, & tranquilitatem communem Reipublicae Christianae., Aluares Pela­gius Aluares, Pelag. d. Planct. Eccles. lib. 1. ar. 37. Apud illum resi­det Regalis siue Imperialis Dignitatis plenitudo, cui de jure competit Imperium transferre. Ibid. Vnde verè & proprie Papa Monarcha est Occidentis. Jbid Sicut [...] fidelis dubitat quando Christus suerit Rex & Sacerdos, & Rex Coeli & Terrae, &c. Sic nullus Catholicus dubitare debet, quin summus Vicarius Ge­neralis in Terris, pariter vtramque habeat potestatem: imò non longè esset ab Haeresi, contrarium perti­naciter affirmare., Augustinus ab Anchona August. ab Anchona. Sum. d. Eccles. q. 1. ar. 1. Immediata potestas Iurisdictionis omnium Spiritualium & Temporalium est Solum in Papa., Panormitan Panormitan. Cap. Sicut de jure. Idem, ca. per Venerab. Ext. Qui sint filij Legitimi. [...]. Terran. lib. d. Monarchia. Et ego si exaltatus fuero omnia traham ad [...] id. est [...] regna & Imperia Mundi recuperabo, & Principibus auferam. Boter. D Comment. lib. 13. pa. 303. Refert. Baron. Sent. d. Excom. Venetor. Duplex est B. Pater Ministerium Petri, pascere & occidere. Dixit enim ad eum Dominus, pasce Oues meas. Audiuit è Coelo vocem, Occide & manduca, pascere Oues, est suscipere curam obsequentium fidelium Christianorum, mansuetudine, humi­litate, ac pietate, Oues & Agnos prae se ferentium, cum vero non cum Ouibus sed refractarijs & aduersan­tibus agendum est, jubetur Petrus eas occidere, obsistere scilicet pugnare, & expugnare, ne tales sint peni­tus, sed quod hujusmodi occisio, non esse debeat, nisi ex summa Charitate, quod occidit jubetur mandu­care. Nempè per Charitatem intra sua viscera recondere, in seipsum condere, vt simus vnum & idem cum Christo, quod dicebat Apostolus, Cupio vos in visceribus Christi Iesu. Sic igitur non est occisio ista crude­litas, sed Pietas, atque sinceritas, cum sic occidendo saluatur, quod verè perierat., yea, and with the Deuill himselfe.

IESVIT.

In Points where there is libertie of Opinion, I shall E still encline to that part, which doth most fauour the quiet, tranquilitie, honour, and temporall independencie of my Prince. Wherefore I humbly craue of your most gracious Maiestie, to be content with this my answer, and [Page 576] reuerent silence, springing as well from respect vnto your A sacred Person, and Authoritie, as also from vowed obedi­ence vnto the Generall of our Order, who hath particu­larly forbidden vs all to treat of this odious Argument, not to giue your Maiestie any cause of iust offence, as ap­peareth by what I here insert out of his owne Letters. Praecipitur in virtute Sanctae Obedientiae, sub poena Excommunicationis & inhabilitatis, ad quaeuis offi­cia, suspensionis à Diuinis, & alijs Praepositi Genera­lis arbitrio reseruatis, ne quis nostrae Societatis pub­licé, B aut priuatim, praelegendo, seu consulendo, mul­to etiam minus libros conscribendo, affirmare prae­sumat, licitum esse cuiquam personae, quocunque praetextu Tyrannidis, Reges aut Principes occidere, seu mortem eis machinari. Prouinciales autem qui aliquid eorum resciuerint, nec emandarint, aut non praeuenerint incommoda quae ex contraria opinione sequi possunt, efficiendo vt hoc Decretum Sancte ob­seruetur, C non modo praedictas poenas incurrere, sed etiam Officio priuari voluit.

Pub. Claudius Epist. Dat. 1614. 1. Augusti.

In virtute Obedientiae commendatur Prouinciali­bus, ne in sua Prouincia quidquam quacunque occa­sione aut lingua euulgari patiantur à nostris, in quo de potestate summi Pontificis supra Reges Principes­que, D aut de Tyrannicidio agatur, &c. Ex Epist. P. Claudij, Dat. 1614. 2. August.

ANSWER.

There is (touching the maine) no libertie of Opinion in this case. Your Great Master must be aut Caesar, aut nullus, eyther all or nothing Auentin. An­nal. lib. 6. pa. 446. Romani sibi Di­uinū vsurpant ho­norem, rationem Actorum reddere nolunt, nec sibi dici [...] animo ferunt cur ita agis? Illud Satyricum inculcant, Sic volo sic jubeo sit proratione voluntas. Idem, lib. 7. Dictum Eberhardi. Flamines illi Babylomiae, soli [...] cupiunt, ferre parem non possunt.. And that which you adde concerning the Ge­nerall of your Order, is a meere Illusion: For may not, yea, E must not, the Generall of your Order, if the Lord Pope re­quire [Page 577] it, vntie this fast knot of Iesuiticall fidelitie, to the tem­porall A state Abbas. Vsperg. Chronic. Anno Dom. 1171. Et vt creditur, de Au­thoritate Alexan­dri Papae, spretis iuramentis, coepe­runt rebellare.? and what safetie can Princes inioy, by relying vp­on those seruants which stand Centinell at an houres warning, to follow their greater Master? And what if the next moneth after, the Generall of your Order will send to you and your fel­lowes, the like Mandatorie Letters to the contrarie? To say the truth, your answere hath made the whole matter more suspi­tious. For what need you and your brood be thus curbed by a voluntatrie and prouisionall Mandate, touching Recicide, vnlesse you were otherwise proni ad rem, bent to mischiefe: Et luxato hoc freno, and this Paper bridle being, broken to broach and in­culcate B it? If this your Masters hand shall cast Crosse in stead of Pile, what shall we expect from such Gamesters, Quibus ludus sunt capita & diademata Regum?

IESVIT.

This onely I hope J may with your Maiesties good liking affirme, That our Catholicke Doctrine in this Point, is no­thing so preiuditiall to Princes, as are the Opinions of most Caluinists and Lutherans, expressed in their Writings, whereof we haue in this age but ouer-euident and lamen­table C examples, to the world, and your Maiestie not vn­knowne. And had the Authours of the Gunpowder Treason, (which from my soule I abhorre) kept themselues within the bounds of Catholicke Doctrine, they had neuer vnder­gone that most odious and abominable enterprise.

ANSWER.

By a draught of Sea water one may iudge of the brackish­nesse D of the whole. His gratious Maiestie hath tasted alreadie of some fruits of Popish loyaltie; and the Gunpowder Trea­son, animalised by Iesuits, but now disauowed (for it succeeded not) is a Watchword for prudent men not to confide in them, whom the leuen of Superstition hath sowred. But is the wit of a Iesuit growne so barren? Haue you no other euasion but by recrimination, and that impertinent? For as concerning your Flim-flam of Caluinists and Lutherans: I answere, His Maie­stie, and the State of England hath felt no such disturbance, but haue obserued by long experience, that it cannot enter into any E true Protestants heart, vpon any occasion whatsoeuer, to lift vp their heads against the Lords Annointed; and if any vnsound or equiuocall member appeare among them, diuerse from the true bodie, let them receiue censure according to their demerits.

IESVIT. A

As for the other Question which your Maiestie propo­seth particularly to my selfe, viz. What I thinke Subiects ought to doe, in the case of Papall deposition of their Prince? I can giue no better Councell vnto others than what J am resolued to take my selfe. First, to pray for peace and tranquilitie, and true concord betweene both parties. Se­condly, to exhort all, to doe all other good offices tending B thereunto, and rather to suffer with patience, than any way concurre to the preiudice of the Prince, or distur­bance of the Commonwealth. Thirdly, J doe protest before Almightie God, that I would rather offer my selfe to die than any way to bee accessarie to your Maiesties death. All which things (most sincerely vttered by mee) I humbly beg your Maiestie would vouchsafe to receiue, as issuing from the conceits and hearts of all my Profession, whose in­stitutes, C particularly commandeth respect and obedience to all in authoritie, as in the beginning of this Discourse I made plaine vnto your Maiestie, vnto whom, wee especi­ally who are your borne subiects To vs particularly our Generall in a Letter [...] thus, Prae omnibus [...] sibi ha­beant vt rebus po­liticis & à nostra professione alienis (alioqui licitis) ne se immisceant. Nam ab [...] quae Principem offen­dere possunt vel Reipublicae statum perturbare certum est non modo ipsis abstinendum sed vbi commode pos­sunt & etiam alij id praestant curan­dum. Ita Claudius A­quauiua in literis datis 9. Ian. 1607. doe beare so vnfained affection, that we should thinke our selues happie, if your Maiestie would vouchsafe but to make tryall thereof; not doubting but your Excellent Iudgement would soone dis­couer vs, to be not onely as loyall as any other of your Sub­iects, but more willing to imploy our wits, pennes, and la­bours, D euen with hazard of our liues, in performing your Maiesties Commandements, than many who inioying the fauour of the time, make faire shewes of their owne af­fections and fidelitie, and vncharitably traduce vs as capitall enemies to your Maiestes Person, State, and Dignitie.

ANSWER. E

It is needlesse to make many words, for if your heart and pen accord, testifie the same by taking the Oath of Allegiance, and by renouncing the pestilent opinion of Equiuocation. [Page 579] therwise your Insinuations and Blandishments, are but Maskes A and Tectures of latent perfidiousnesse: and they which are ac­quainted with Romish guile, must still suspect that you play the Foxe.

Astutam vapido gestans sub pectore vulpem,
Ore aliud retinens, aliud sub pectore Condens.

Now concerning this precedent passage, let it bee obserued, how the Iesuit hath not answered, but declined his Maiesties Question. And we must hold him to stand mute, as one not da­ring to put himselfe to his Countrey, lest he be found guiltie. For the question is, What ought the subiect to doe, in case a Pope de­pose B the King? The Iesuits answere is, I pray for peace, I exhort o­thers, I would rather die, &c. Hansome complements, but no secu­ritie. If his Holinesse send another wind, you which haue vowed strict obedience to the Pope, must turne your sailes, your Votes and Prayers must bound another way, you must exhort others to execute the Popes pleasure, and if they and you perish in the Popes quarrell, you die Martirs, and goe to heauen in a string.

The IESVITS Conclusion. C

HAuing performed your Maiesties will and pleasure, in seeking to giue satisfaction about the Nine principall points that withhold your Royall assent from ioyning vnto the Roman Church; my poore indeauours prostrate at your Maiesties feet to receiue their doome, humbly beseech this fauor, That your charitie, and desire of the vnitie of the Church, may ioyne together with your excellent Wisdome and Learning, to pronounce the sentence. Although I be confident, D that examining Religion by the meere rigour of only Scrip­ture, the Catholicke Doctrines would get the victorie, more cleare and expresse Testimonies standing on our side, than any that Protestants can bring for themselues, as by the for­mer Discourse may appeare; although also I be much more confident in the Tradition & perfect practise of the Church, interpreting Scripture, which by so full consent deliuers the Roman Doctrines, that partialitie it selfe, duely pondering, E can hardly in heart, and in wardly iudge against them: yet my chiefest hope is, in those charitable thoughts and desires of Peace and Vnitie in the whole Christian world, which the holy Ghost hath inspired into your Religious brest.

ANSVVER. A

You deceiue your selfe, touching his Maiestie: for not onely these Nine points, but many other, detaine his royal assent from ioyning with the Romane Faith.

Secondly, Your ostentation of proouing these Articles, by the meere rigout of sole Scripture, is, Vanitas Vanitatum, A va­nitie beyond vanitie: for the learned of your owne part ac­knowledge, that many of your Romish Articles, are neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture Bannes. in 22. q. 1. ar. 10. p. 169. Non omnia quae ad Catholicam fi­dem pertinent in libris Canonicis continentur neque aperte neque ob­scurè. Ibid. pa. 170. Orationes esse ad Sanctos faciendas, venerandas esse e­orum Imagines, memoriasque eo­rundem in Eccle­sia celebrandas so­lenniter, Sacramenta Ordinis & Confirmationis non esse iteranda, neque etiam im presse & inuolute sacrae literae docent. Canus. loc. li 3. ca. 3. fundam. 3. Sanctorum Martyrum auxilium precibus implorandum, eorum (que) memorias celebrandas, imagines venerandus esse, In sacrificio Eucharistiae simul cum corpore san­guinem sacerdotibus esse conficiendum & sumendum: Sacramenta confirmationis & ordinis non iteranda, Sacrae literae nusquam forte tradiderunt.. Nei­ther againe can your Faith subsist, if it be tried by Genuine and B Orthodoxall Tradition Ireneus lib. 3. cap. 2. Euenit itaque, neque Scripturisiam, ne (que) traditioni consentire eos.: for your selfe in this Treatise, where­in you performe as much in substance as your cause will beare, haue made no demonstration of any one Article, by the Testi­monie of perpetuall Tradition: and it seemeth to me, that you are conscious hereof, because in your Conclusion you fall vp­on a new Disputation, and seeke to inferre a necessitie of redu­cing all Controuersies, to the meere and absolute determina­tion of the Romane Church and Pope, who will not faile to be fast friends to themselues Lancellet. Conrad. Temp. om. Iudic. lib. 2. cap. 1. d. Pontif. §. 3. n. 5. Sacro­sancta Rom. Ecclesia fas de omnibus habet iudicandi, neque cuiquam licet, de [...] iudicare iudicio. Cap. Cuncta per mundum. & ca. fi. 9. q. 3. cum fini.. C

IESVIT.

For suppose, that praeconceit (instilled into tender D minds) against them, thinke, comparing Catholickes with Protestants, that Scriptures stand equally on both sides, (yea sifting the matter by Scripture onely that Protestants may seeme to haue the vpper hand) yet Charitie will mooue this Question, Whether the Testimonies and Arguments they bring from Scripture, are so vndeniably cleare, and so vnauoidably strong, that no answere or euasion may bee found, but the Romane Church must bee refused, notwith­standing so much discord and dissention, so much inconstan­cie E and incertainetie about Religion, which (as reason proo­ueth) must, and (as experience sheweth) doth, thereupon ensue.

ANSWER. A

First, Protestants doe not onely bring Arguments and Testi­monies of Scripture against the Roman faith, but also the testi­monie of Antiquitie, and all other grounds of veritie.

Secondly, their arguments from Scripture, are such as can­not be auoided, but onely by Sophistrie; Ireneus. li. 3. ca. 2. More serpen­tum lubrici vndi­que, &c. and in this manner, the very arguments of Christ for the resurrection, Matth. 22. 32. and the testimonies which Councells and Fathers vse [...] Arrians, Pelagians, and sundry other Heretikes, may re­ceiue B appearing and seeming solutions.

Thirdly, if the Scripture it selfe, and the doctrine of the Primi­tiue Church, with other grounds of learning, cannot (as our Ad­uersarie obiecteth) de facto, or presupposing the malice of some persons, [...] all discord, and inconstancie of Religion; much lesse can the determination of the Roman Church effect this. For if men will not regard Moses, and the Prophets, &c. If an An­gell come from heauen, or if one rise from the dead, they may still cauill and refuse to beleeue. But for the externall repres­sing of petulant Spirits, a free and lawfull Councell Gerson. tom. 1. potest. Eccles. Leet. 11. Cum sū ­mus pontifex sit peccabilis, & pos­sit potestatem in destructionē con­uertere: similiter Sacrum Collegi­um quod eidatum est & [...], non est in gratia confirmatum: superest vt aliqua sitrelicta nobis inobliquabilis & indeuiabilis regula à Christo, secundum quam possit abusus huiusmodi, reprimi, dirigi, ac moderari. Haecautem regula, vel est Ecclesia, vel Conci­lium generale. Idem. d. Exam. Doctr. Consid. 1. Finalis judex doctrinarum fidem tangentium est D generale Concilium. were to C be desired, and a disposition of heart in Christian Princes, and in other worthy members of the Church, to submit them­selues to a Tryall by the holy Scripture, and the doctrine of the Primitiue Church, and vpon the same to conclude a com­mon Peace in Christianitie, and to represse by Discipline, and Authoritie, factious and turbulent Incendiaries, either of the Romish or Protestant part.

IESVIT.

For if you cast away the Roman Church and her au­thoritie, no Church is left in the World that can with rea­son, or dares for shame, challenge to be infallible in her de­finitions: and if such a Church be wanting, What meanes is E left, either to keepe the learned certainly in peace, or to giue vnto the ignorant assurance, what is the Doctrine of sal­uation the Apostles first preached?

ANSWER. A

You doe well to name Daring and [...]: for if the Papall faction had not passed all shame, they had not to their vsurpati­ons of iurisdiction, added the forgerie and vaunt of absolute in­tallibilitie; a priuiledge, which (I make no doubt) no Pope (without or with his Papall Councells) euer in his inward conscience thought himselfe to haue. But as for Ecclesiasticke decisions and determinations, we say, that although the abso­lute authoritie of the Roman Church be refused, and although B no other Church in the world can truely challenge absolute in­fallibilitie of iudgement, but conditionall onely, or restrictiue, so farre as it propoundeth and confirmeth doctrine out of the Sacred Scriptures; yet the learned may be preserued in peace, and the ignorant in assurance of veritie.

First, The Holy Ghost hath already determined all questi­ons of faith (necessary for the Church to vnderstand) by his owne immediate decisiue voice, deliuered in Sacred Scripture, expresly or deriuatiuely [...]. li. d. Exam. doctr. p. 2. Consid. 1. Attendendum est in examinatione doctrinarum primò & principaliter, si doctrina sit conformis C Sacrae Scripturae, tam in se quam in modi traditione. Declaratur ex authoritate B. Dyonisij, dicentis, nihil audendum dicere de Diuinis, nisi quae nobis à sacra Scriptura tradita sunt. Cuiusratio est, quoniam Scrip­tura nobistradita est, tanquam regula sufficiens & infallibilis, pro regimine totius Ecclesiastici corporis, & membrorum vsque in finem seculi. Est igitur talis ars, talis regula, vel exemplar, cui se non conformans alia doctrina, vel abijcienda est vt haeretica, aut suspecta, aut impertinens ad religionem est [...]..

Secondly, if any other question arise touching History, mat­ter of Fact, naturall or morall Veritie, Ceremonies, and exter­nall Policie, &c. the same may bee sufficiently decided by Christian prudence working vpon the principles of Reason, hu­mane Historie, rules of Art, and by the examples of former D times, and principally by the generall rules of holy Scripture: and many questions are raysed by the curiositie and subtletie of men, wherein if the Church be ignorant Chrys. in Mat. Hom. 7. Prestat proba ignoratione detineri, quam falsa opinione [...]. Aug. in 6. Psalm. Nos quod nescire nos Dominus voluit, liben­tèr nesciamus. Tertul. d. Anima. ca. t. Quis reuelabit, quod Deus texit? vnde sciscitandum est? Vnde & ignorare tutissimum est. [...] per Deum ignorare quia non reuetauerit, quam per hominem feire, quia iple presumpserit. Aug. d. ver. Ap. ser. 7. Mehor est fidelis fidelisignorantia, quam temeraria Scientia. Idem. d. Genes. ad lit. li. 8. ca. 5. Melius est dubitare de occultis quam litigare de incertis. Idem. Enchir. ca. 59. Cum ista queruntur & ea sicut potest quisque [...], non inutihter exercentur ingenia, si adhibeatur disoep­tatio moderata, & absit error opinantium se scire quod nesciunt. Quid enim opus est, vt haec atque alia E [...], affirmentur vel negentur, vel definiantur cum disermine, quando sine crimine nesciantur., and vnresolued, there ensueth no preiudice in respect of faith.

Thirdly, if contentious persons lust to continue such, the de­termination of the Roman Church, or Councell, cannot quell [Page 583] or stifle contention, but onely as an humane Iudge, and by the A same authoritie with other Churches. It is also remarkeable, that the definitions of the Roman Church it selfe, are vncer­taine, ambiguous, mutable, and such, as Defacto, leaue matter of strife among those persons which submit themselues to the resolution thereof. The Dominicans and Iesuits contend egerly at this day, concerning the sence and Exposition ofthe Trent Councell Concil. Trid. Sess. 6. ca. 6. Ne­que homo ille ni­hil omnino agit, inspirationem illā recipiens quippe qui illam abijcere potest. Ib. Can. 4. Nec posse dissen­tire si velit. Alua­res. d. Auxil. li. 3. disp. 18. Suares. Opuse. [...]. Auxil. li. 3. ca. 9., in the question of Grace and Free-will. Suares and Vasques, two prime Iesuits, are diuided about the sence of that Councell, in the matter of Merit and Satisfacti­on Trid. Concil. ca. 8. Omnis glo­riatio nostra in Christo est, in quo viuimus, in quo maeremur, in quo satisfactionis, &c. Suares. d. grat. part. 3. li. 12. ca. 19. In quo modernus quidam grauis. Vasq. 1.2. Disp. 204. n. 68. Quod aiunt Trid. Concili­um, C &c. non possum satis mirari viros doctos ex hoctestimonio, &c.: the like differences are found among many moderne B Schoolemen, touching the manner of worshipping Images, and concerning the presence of Christs Body in the Eucharist, whether the same be there by adduction or production, where­in Bellarmine holdeth the first, and Suares the latter opinion. And if our Aduersarie eleuate these dissentions, pretending them to be small; surely they are as waightie as the differences amongst Protestants.

And lastly, whatsoeuer Romists pretend to the contrarie, the transcendent Authority of Popes, is no sufficient or Soueraigne means to preserue vnitie, either of faith or charitie in the Chri­stian world: for when the Papacie was most predominant, the Christian world was distracted with contentions about Re­ligion; to wit, between the Romans, Graecians, and other Chur­ches; and it was imbroyled with bloudy wars betweene Popes and other Princes and Emperours Otho Frising. Chron. li. 6. ca. 36. Quāta mala, quot D bella, bellorumoque discrimina, inde secuta sunt, quoties misera Roma obsessa, capta, vastata, &c. Deni­que tot mala, tot Schysmata, tot tam animorum quam corporum pericula, huius tempestatis turbo inuo­luit, vt solus ex persecutionis immanitate ac temporis diuturnitate ad humanae miseriae infoelicitatem, suf­ficeret comprobandum vnde à quodam Ecclesiastico Scriptore, densissimis AEgipti tenebris comparatur. Ibid. ca. 33. Quos dum Leo papa, cum militia ad vrbem rediens Ecclesiae & imperij finibus coercere vult commissio praelio caesis multis fugere Beneuentum compellitur. Tanta verò strages vtrorumque ibi facta fuit, quod a ceruus ex ossibus mortuorum compactus, hactenus ab Indigenis illic monstratur. Auentin. An­nal. li. 6. pa. 480. Per triginta tres annos à Gregorio & vrbano continenter sanguine ouium belligeratum est. Ibid. li. 7. pa. 547. Confunditur omne ius, & leges pereunt. Non fides in hominibus, non pax, non humani­tas, non pudor, non veritas, atque ita neque securitas, neque regimen, nequerequies a malis vlla est. Omnis terra tumultuatur, fremunt vndique bella, omnes gentes in armis sunt, & se inuicem oppugnant Ciuitates finitimae inter se praeliantur, euertuntur Regna Ciuitates funditus intereunt ferro atque igne. Lambert. [...]. Hist. Germanorum Anno. 1064. Parmensis Episcopus armata multitudine non modica Luccensem E­piscopum, E sede Apostolica per vim deturbare aggressus est, è contra fautoribus illius ad arma impigrè [...], congressio facta est, multique hinc & inde vulneribus acceptis corruerunt, sic deprauta Eccle­siastici Rigoris censura, homines non vt quondam vt praeossent Ecclesiae Dei injecta manu trahebantur; sed ne non praeessent armata manu praeliabantur, fundebantque mutuò sanguinem, non pro ouibus Christi, sed ne non dominarentur ouibus Christi. Tho. Walsing. Hist. Anglor. in Henric. 4. pa. 420. Ducenta millia oc­cisa in bellis quae paparum schysma sequuta, &c., and the Roman See it selfe [Page 584] was rant into Factions, by occasion of Antipopes. Neither was A the transcendent authority of the Roman Church any effectu­all meanes to promote common vnitie, but the Ambition and Oppression thereof, was a perpetuall Seminarie, and incentiue of mischiefe and discord: therefore the meanes for his most excellent Maiestie to cause vnitie in the Christian world, is not the aduancing of Papall Supremacie, which is a firebrand of contention; but the maintaining of the Supreame authoritie of the Scripture, and the procuring (if it might be) of a free and lawfull Councell, wherein the word of Christ may haue Pre­heminence, and wherein the Pope may be a Subiect, as well as B other Pastours.

IESVIT.

A Church fallible in her teaching, is by the learned to be trusted no further than they doe see her Doctrine conso­nant vnto Scripture, and so they may neglect her Iudge­ment, when they seeme to haue euidences of Scripture against her; and if this libertie of Contradiction be gran­ted, C What hope of vnitie remaines, when a priuate man may wrangle eternally with the whole Church, and neuer be conuinced apparently of teaching against the Scriptures, whereof we haue too many examples.

ANSWER.

A Church fallible in Iudgement, is to be trusted, when it confirmeth her doctrine by the word of God, which is an in­fallible D witnesse. And although a Church be subiect to possi­bilitie of Errour, and although the doctrine thereof wanting Diuine proofe, is not to be receiued of the learned as matter of Faith Cyril. Chat. 4. d. Spir. Sanct. [...], &c. N mihi quidem ea tibi proferenti simpli­citer fidem adhi­beas nisi de Diuinis Scripturis eorum quae dicam demonstrationem accipias. Nam fidei nostrae salus & con­seruatio, non orationis facundia nititur, sed Scripturarum diuinarum comprobatione. Aug. c. Don. li. 7. c. 48. Quia nullam rationem vel authoritatem Scripturarum attulit, diu nos tenere non debet., yet no libertie of contesting the lawfull authoritie of the same when it (confirmeth her sayings by Gods word) is hereby permitted to contentious Spirits: and it is more pro­bable, That Pastors of the Church, assembled in Gods feare and not factiously for their owne ends, shall iudge aright, than Popes, which referre all things to their owne worldly ends. E Also it is one thing to contradict a Church, defining and spea­king of it selfe, and another, when it deliuereth the doctrine of [Page 585] Christ. Now whensoeuer the preaching of the Church is A according to the rule of holy Scripture, the voice thereof is the voice of Christ, and all people, learned and vnlearned, are bound to heare and obey the same.

IESVIT.

If wetake out of the world a Church infallible, whence shall ignorant men learne which is the Doctrine of salua­tion the Apostles deliuered? It is as euident as the Sunne B shining at noone day, and the euidence of the thing hath forced some Protestants to acknowledge, That the Contro­uersies Field of the Church, in the Preface. of Religion in our time, are growne in number so many, and in nature so intricate, that few haue time and leasure, fewer strength of vnderstanding to examine them: so that nothing remaines for men desirous of satis­faction in things of such consequence, but diligently to search out, which amongst all the societies of men in the C world, is the Church of the liuing God, the Pillar and ground of Truth, that so they may imbrace her Communi­on, follow her Directions, rest in her Iudgement.

ANSWER.

If the rule be infallible, and the Preaching of Pastours ac­cording to that rule; ignorant persons, by the assistance of Grace, may learne the doctrine of saluation from their tea­ching, D without the least thought or reference more to the Ro­mane Church, than to any other Church: for although Saint Augustine and Saint Cyprian were subiect to errour, yet the vn­learned people of Hippo and Carthage receiued right Faith by their Ministerie, with assurance, that the same descended from the Apostles.

And it is as euident as the Sunne shining, that the Word of Christ is the sole authenticall ground of Faith Gerson. part. 1. d. potest. Eccles. Consid. 13. Considerari debet Ecclesia prout instituta est à Christo, supra [...] Petram fidei ad finem supernaturalem, secundum legem Euangelicam & Sacrae Scripturae diuinitus reuelatae, secundum quam re­gulati E debet iudicium de fide, & motibus subditorum, quoniam rectum index est sui & obliqui. Idem. d. Exam. Doctr. part. 1. Consid. 2. Determinatio solius Papae in hijs quae sunt fidei non obligat praecise vt [...] ad credendum. Idem. d. pot. Eccles. Lect 11. Cum summus Pontifex sit peccabilis, &c. Similiter Sa­crum Concilium quod ei datum est & coasistit, non est in gratia confirmatum, &c., and the onely [Page 586] infallible rule to decide Controuersies; and the Pastours of A other Churches, if they vse the meanes, and haue sufficient knowledge, and the assistance of ordinarie Grace, may bee as infallible in their Doctrine as Romane Prelates.

And although vnlearned people depend vpon their Pastours like sicke men vpon their Physitions, yet where they inioy the free vse of the holy Scripture, as in antient times all people did: and if they be carefull of their owne saluation, and desire to know the truth, God blesseth his owne ordinance, and ordi­narily assisteth them by his grace, in such sort, as that they shall not be seduced to damnation. Math. 24.24. And if they be di­stracted B in smaller points by the dissentions of Teachers, their Errour in this case is excuseable Binnes. 22. q. 1. ar. 10. pa. 135. Quod si inter eos sit dissensio sim­plices fideles ex­cusabuntur iuxta communes regu­las sequendo sententiā cuiuslibet partis: non tamen inde sequitur, quod vel fides deficiat nam aliqui eorum veram fidem tenebunt.. But howsoeuer, the Ro­man Church can be no greater stay to them than other Chur­ches, but onely by leading them to a blind obedience Cusan. Exercit. li. 6. Obedientia irrationalis, est consummata obedientia & perfectissima, scilicet quando obeditur sine inquisitione rationis, sicut iumentum obedit Domino suo., like as Pagans are led in another kind.

Dr. Fields testimonie concerning the necessitie of learning, C which is the true Church, the ground and Pillar of Truth, &c. serueth not to prooue, That the definition of any moderne Church is absolutely and vniuersally the rule of Faith, and su­preame Iudge of all Controuersies, or free from all Errour: for this learned Diuine speaketh of the Catholike Church in generall, as it containes the holy Apostles, and those which succeeded them in all ages, in the teaching of the doctrine which they deliuered to the world. And concerning the pre­sent Church, he ascribeth no more vnto it, but to be a manu­duction and guider to sauing veritie, confirmed and grounded D vpon the holy Scripture: neither maketh he the authoritie and definition thereof absolute, but dependant vpon the word of God.

IESVIT.

Jf there be no Church besides the Roman in the world, that can with any colour pretend infallibilitie of Iudge­ment; Jf the most part of men cannot by their examining E of Controuersie be resolued in faith, and therefore must pe­rish eternally except they find a Church that is an infalli­ble Mistresse of truth, in whose iudgement they may secure­ly rest; certainely those that haue bowells of charitie, will [Page 587] accept of any probable answer vnto Protestants Obiecti­ons A and accusations, rather than discredit the authoritie of so necessarie a Church, which being discredited, no Church remaines in the world of credit sufficient to sustaine the waight of Christian, that is infallible beleefe.

ANSWER.

Vnlearned people must relye vpon the Ministerie of some moderne Church, not as a ground and rule of their faith, but B as an helper of their faith: and although the Ministerie of the Church, whereupon they depend, is not absolutely infallible, or free from Errour, yet their saluation is not by this meanes impeached, neither doe they perish eternally. For it is not necessarie, That a Church subiect to errour (as Hippo, Car­thage, Lions, &c. in the dayes of S. Augustine, S. Cyprian, S. Ireneus) shall at all times actually erre, or grieuously erre at any time: and when it deliuereth the doctrine of holy Scrip­ture, it is herein free from errour; and Christian people, by C comparing the doctrine thereof with the Scripture Chrys. Praefat. in Epist. ad Rom. & vos si lectioni cum omni alacri­tate volueritis at­tendere, nullo alio praeterea opus ha­bebitis. Verusenim est sermo Christi cum dicit querite & inuenietis, pul­sate & aperictur vobis.: may cer­tainely know that it erreth not, Act. 17. 11. And touching the Roman Church, Vpon what grounds are Christian people able to know by assurance of faith, That the doctrine there­of is more infallible than the doctrine of other Churches? But if Rome is Babylon, described Reuelat. ca. 14. 8. & 17, 5. & 18. 2. as weightie motiues induce some men to thinke Orat. P. Cor­barij. apud Auen­tin. Annal. li. 7. pa. 616. Sicuti pastor est personatus, ita mysticus est Antichristus: canis pellicula tectus, in gregem Christi lupina rabie grassatur. Vendit scelera, in feros, superos, beneficia caelestia cauponatur, &c. Monstrum biceps, mundanus & spiritualis esse contendit.) then it is most safe for people to renounce the Communion of this Church, as it now beleeueth, and to liue in the fellow­ship D of that Church which groundeth her faith on holy Scrip­ture, and not vpon the traditions of men Gerson. d sig. Ruinae. Eccl. signo. 8. Fabulae & non sanae doctrinae sunt, &c. Quae non in Reuelatione Spiritus Sancti, sed secundum traditionem hominum consistant., Apoc. 18.4.

IESVIT.

What amiserie will it be if it fall out (as it is most E likely it will fall out) That at the day of Iudgement the most part of English Protestants be found to haue beleeued points of Doctrine necessarie to saluation, not [Page 588] out of their owne certaine skill in Scripture, as they should A by the principles of their Religion, but vpon the credit of the Church that teachech them, which doth acknowledge her selfe to be no sufficient stay of assured beleefe: for with­out question, men cannot be saued who although they be­leeued the truth, yet beleeued it vpon a deceiueable ground, and consequently by humane and fallible persuasion, and not (as need is) by a diuine most certaine beleefe grouuded vpon aninfallible foundation, which cannot be had without an infallible Church. B

ANSWER.

What a miserie will it be, if it fall out (as it is certaine it will) That at the day of Iudgement, the greatest part of Eng­lish Romists be found, to haue renounced the expresse and manifest word of Christ, and the sincere faith of the Primi­tiue Church, and in stead thereof, to haue imbraced lying va­nities, and the deceiueable Traditions Cypr. Ep. 74. Quae ista obstina­tio quaeue prae­sumptio humanā Traditionem di­uinae dispositioni anteponere. of the man of finne, C the sonne of perdition, who exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God, or that is worshipped, 2. Thes. 2, 3, 4. For out of all doubt, men cannot be saued which haue forsaken the fountaine of liuing Waters, and hewed them out Ci­sternes, euen broken Cisternes that can hold no Waters, Ier. 2. 13. And if any man worship the beast, and his Image, and receiue his marke in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drinke of the wine of the wrath of God, &c. and hee shall be tormented with fire and brimstone, Apoc. 14. 9, 10. And on the contrarie, they which heare the D voyce of Christ speaking by the holy Scriptures Chrys. Sup. Gen. Hom. 5. Di­uinae Scripturae testimonia sequa­mur, neque fera­mus eos qui teme­re quiduis blatc­rant. Ibid. Nos quibus donatū est, solis justi tiae radi­is illustrari, diui­narum Scriptura­rum doctrinis au­scultemus, & hunc canonem sequen­tes, salubres doctrinas in mentis nostrae promptuaria reponamus., and build their faith vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apo­stles, Iesus Christ himselfe being the head corner stone, Eph. 2. 20. Ioh. 10. 27: all they which keepe the commuande­ments of God, and the faith of Iesus, Apoc. 14. 12. refusing to worship Angells, Col. 2. 18. or dead Images, 1. Ioh. 5. 20; which call vpon God in the name of Iesus onely; which receiue the holy Eucharist in both kinds, according to our Sauiours Precept, and the constant practise of the Primitiue Church; which beleeue free remission of sinnes, and iustifi­cation E by a liuely faith, for the sole merits of Christ; which [Page 589] honour the King as Gods Supreame Vicegerent, which A praise God with vnderstanding, and inuocate the blessed Tri­nitie in a knowne Language, and maintaine obedience to all Morall and Euangelicall Commandements, and submit their priuate iudgement to the authoritie of the Apostolicke and Catholicke Church. All these, I say, build their soules vp­on the Rocke, and not vpon the sands; the gates of hell can­not preuaile against them, and maugre all the limmes of An­tichrist, they shall neuer perish, neither shall any man plucke them out of their Sauiours hand. B

IESVIT.

How dreadfull then must the danger bee of liuing out of the lap of the Roman Church, that is, of a Church of infallible authoritie.

This Church hauing a most glorious succession of Bi­shops from the Apostles, deserues aboue all other, the protection of your Maiestie, (that by a long line of re­ligious C Catholicke Ancestours, succeeding in the right of two Illustrious Kingdomes) and being so beneficiall vnto mankinde, and so efficatious to maintaine vnitie, cannot giue ouer hope of your fauour, whom singular preseruation in the wombe of your glorious Mother, a­gainst the barbarous attempts of Hereticall diuision, that would haue brought you to an immature end, shewes to bee, by Gods infinite wisedome preordained, for some D singular good of mankinde, specially by your meanes, to quench warres and dissentions, and to bestow the bles­sings of Peace and vnion on this Land.

Your title to the Crowne of England, springs from the peacefull coniunction of the two renowned Roses, which before were mortall enemies, and fought so ma­nie cruell fields, that if wee consider the great effusion of blood wherein each of them were bathed, wee shall E hardly discerne the one from the other by the diuersitie of colour.

Your Maiesties person is the roote of a more happie [Page 590] Vnion of two most glorious Kingdomes, by your Sacred A Person combined in assured Peace, which in the Histories of former times, are by no other markes more famously knowne, than by their mutuall warres.

Nothing remaines to bee added for the full consum­mation of this Ilands happinesse, and your Maiesties im­mortall glorie, but the quenching of discord about Re­ligion, by bringing them backe againe to the Roote and Matrice of the Catholicke Church, to the principall See, B from which Sacerdocall and Sacred Vnitie springs, where­by Cyril. lib. Ep. 45. your Maiestie shall extend the blessings of Peace from this Iland, to the rest of Europe, from the bodie vnto the soule, and Crowne your temporall Peace and felicitie, with eternall. For both which, not onely I, but all of my Profession, yea all Catholickes, will offer vnto Almightie God our daily Prayers.

ANSWER. C

Sir Declamator, you vsurpe Radamanthus his office ouer his head, and being a delinquent, make your selfe a Iudge. Wee vnderstand your vttermost strength, in propugning the absolute Soueraignitie of the Roman Church. The essence of your Creede, in this and other points, consisteth in suppo­sall and conceit. For our selues, wee are assured, by that which cannot deceiue vs (The vndoubted Word of the eter­nall God) that our Faith and Religion is according to Ve­ritie; and wee shall bee iudged at the latter Day, not by D the conceit of our Enemies, but by the Word and Gospell of Christ, Rom. 2. 16. Now the lappe of your Romane Church, since the dayes of Hildebrand and his faction, is in­larged to a vast sise [...]. [...]. d. Gestis Concil. Basil. lib. 1. Nec conside­rant miseri, quia quae praedicant tantopere verba, aut ipsorum sum­morum Pontifi­cum sunt, suas fimbrias extendentium, aut illorum qui eis adulantur., and wee are departed from the filthi­nesse, which is the skirts of that lap, but not from any branch of the Catholicke Faith. Disprooue vs if you bee able, by Diuine authoritie, and then make ostentation at your pleasure. But in the meane time, iudge charitably of vs, who are more readie to entertaine Truth, than you to per­suade vs. E

As for glorious fuccession, about which your triumph, if [Page 591] you want the life and soule thereof, to wit, Apostolicall A Doctrine: and if (according to the relation of your bosome friends) the same, in the verie externall face thereof, hath beene miserably blasted Platina. in Syl­uest. 2. Gilbertus ambitione Diabo­lica dominandi cupiditate impulsus largitione, &c. Idem. in Syluest. 3. Eo tum Pontificatus deuenerat, vt qui plus largitione & ambitione valeret, is tantummodo dignitatis gradum bonis oppressis & reiectis obtineret, quem morem vtinam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora. Idem. in Benedict. 4. Peperit nobis tanta licentia peccandi nullo Principe flagitia hominum tum coercente haec monstra, haec portenta, à quibus ambitione & largitione sanctissima Petri sedes occupata est, potius quam posessa. Sabellic. AEnead. 9. lib. 2. Mos inoleuerat Apostolicae sedis, per vim & Dolum occupand. &c. Boter. Comment. lib. 12. pa. 407. B Iulius 2. cum pecunia & largitionibus pontificatum adeptus esset, apud familiares iactare, hunc a­picem, pluris aestimandum, qnam quae vendi aut emi à curiosis consueuisset. Math. Paris. Chron. in Henr. 3. pa. 702. Cum Papa qui forma & exemplum totius tenetur esse Religionis, vsurarius sit manifestus, fomes Symoniae, pecuniae sititor acraptor, ipsiusque curia forum institorum, imò potius meretricale prostibulum., pardon vs, if we make not our finall and absolute dependence vpon it.

And to proceede to the last part of your Declamation, wherein you sollicite his Maiestie to aduance your Supersti­tion, putting him in remembrance of his preseruation in his Mothers wombe, and of the vniting of the two renowned Roses: You must vnderstand, that his Maiesties royall Per­son was preserued in his Mothers wombe (and at the Pow­der C Treason) by the God of Truth, and hee flourisheth as a Cedar of Libanus, with all honour, happinesse, and safe­tie, and with enioying the vnfained loue of all his Loyall Subiects, by the Faith, Profession, and Protection of that Veritie, which is taught of God, and which will make him blessed at his latter end. But if hee should (which is impossible) bee persuaded to giue eare to such Betuefeus, as many of your Crue are, the White Rose you speake of, by your malice, might againe turne Red: for wheresoeuer the soales of your feet take fast footing, your manner is D to die all things in blood, either by Ciuill Warre, or by Fire and Faggot.

But I wonder vpon what surmise Romists can build their vaine hope, of surprising his Maiestie by plausible Blandish­ments and Insinuations Russin. Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 11. [...] Dolis apud ignorantes iocus est, scientibus ve­ro dolum inten­dere, non aliud est quam risum mo­uere.. These Inchantments are fit for lapsing Ladies, and other mutable Camelions. But our Lord the King Cyprian. d. Disciplin. Flos ille Ecclesiastici germinis, decus atque ornamentum gratiae spiritualis, Illustrior portio Dominicigregis., is as an Angell of God, discerning Good and Euill. The Aduersarie himselfe hath felt the force of the Wise­dome of this Solomon, and one may sooner with a twined thread plucke vp a tall Cedar by the roote, or with a Fishers E line, hale the greatest rocke from the bottome of the Sea, than [Page 592] transplant this great and religious Constantine Cyprian. Ep. 52. Graues viros & semel super Pe­tram solida sta­bilitate fundatos non dico aura leui sed nec vento aut turbine commo­ueri. Idem. d. vnit. Eccles. Triticum non rapit ventus nec arborem solida radice fundatam procella subuertit. Inanes paleae tempestate iactantur, inualidae arbo­res turbinis incursione euertuntur., out of the Pa­radise A Ireneus lib. 5. cap. 20. Ab omni ligno Paradisi escas manduca­bis ait spiritus Dei, id est, ab omni Scriptura Dominica manducate. of Sacred Scripture, into the darke Thicket of hu­mane Traditions Cyprian. Ep. 40. Qui mandatum B Dei reijciunt & Traditionem suam statuere conantur fortiter à vobis & firmiter respuantur. Idem. Serm. d. lapsis, Nec Ecclesiae iungitur qui ab Euangelio seperatur., and night-sprung weedes. Nec dicere ali­quid, nec facere contra Christum potest, cuius & spes, & fides, & virtus, & gloria omnis, in Christo est (Cyprian. lib. d. Lapsis) It is impossible, that (our most gracious King) should speake, or doe any thing for Antichrist, against Christ, whose Hope, and Vertue, and Honour, is all in Christ.

[...].

A TABLE OF THE PRIN­CIPALL MATTERS CONTAINED in this Booke.

A
ACcidents of Bread and Wine without substance.
Fol. 430, 439
Acts of the Apost.
chap. 2. v. 42. 507
Adoration and Veneration.
208
S. Ambrose receiuing the Sacrament in one kind.
503
Angells reioycing at a sinners repen­tance.
515
Angells whether adored?
327. 525
527
Antecedent will of God.
78
Apostolicall Church.
64, 98
Assurance of faith.
165
S. Augustine.
21, 68, 122, 132, 200, 219, 273, 296, 323, 443
Authoritie of the Church.
10, 133, 300
B
Baptisme.
175, 177
Beginning of errour, not alwayes as­signeable out of historie.
131
A Body in many places.
180, 182, 183
The Brasen Serpent.
209
Bread called Christs body. 397. a fi­gure, 401. This is my body. 398, 416. Christs body no fancie, 410, 448. not in many places at once, 450. Truely receiued in the Sacra­ment by faith.
184
C
Caietan and others of Transubstantia­tion.
414, 182
A Cammell through the eye of a nee­dle.
411.
Canonising of Saints.
297
The Canopie in the Greeke Church
378
Chastitie of votaries:
83
Certainetie of faith, not from the Rom. Ch. onely or principally.
5
Catholike Church.
194
Church taken in diuers notions. 49 It consisteth principally of iust per­sons. 51. 53. Obseruations con­cerning the acceptation of the name Church. 51. the authoritie thereof in things adiaphorous. 133, 300. How the ground and pillar of truth. 3.53. The true Church perpetuall. 58. It may erre in deliuerie of Tra­dition. 88. it may be in few.
59, 67, 76, 104
A corrupt Church may teach some veritie, and preserue the text of Scripture.
59, 117
The present Church not equall to the Apostolicall.
118
Councells and Praecepts.
527.531
Coloss. cha. 1. v. 24.
559
Communion of Saints.
557
Communion in one kind.
459.470
Concomitance.
460
The Councell of Constance.
474.501
The Councell of Elliberis.
251
No generall Councell for the first 300 yeares.
119
Councells of the late Rom. Ch. nei­ther generall nor lawfull, 159. Pa­pall Vsurpation and Tyrannie in them.
153
[Page] A lawfull generall Councell desired by Protestants. 157. Acts of Coun­cels not preserued faithfully.
128
Corruptions in the Hierarch. Rom. Ch.
55.57.97
Conuersion of bread into Christ Bo­die.
399.400.421
The new Creed of Rome.
125
Curiositie to be auoided.
582
D
Daniel, chap. 2. vers. 35.
4
Daniel, chap. 4. vers. 24. Redeeme thy sinnes.
546
Discord among Teachers.
71.73
Discord of Romists.
108.583.585
E
Epiphanius of Images.
252
Errours in the Church. 135. funda­mentall and preterfundamentall.
147.197
Esay, chap. 2. vers. 1.
4
Esay, chap. 63. 16.
320
The Eucharist receiued by the hand, 491. sent to priuate houses in both kinds, 504. no reall Sacrifice.
464
Exposition of Scripture by Fathers.
45
F
Faciall vision.
35
Diuine Faith not grounded vpon Ec­cles. Historie. 128. Historie not al­wayes assigneable for change of Faith.
131
Fasting not satisfactorie to God for sinne.
549
Fathers authoritie, 68.87.129. their consent.
121
Doctour Field.
73.140.196.586
A Figure in the words, This is my bodie,
396.397
G
Galath. chap. 3. [...]. maketh not for Images.
281
Gelasius against Transubst. 436. and against Communion in one kinde.
499
Glasse of the Trinitie.
308
Generall Councels.
152, 156
Good Workes strengthen Faith.
519
The Greeke Church.
115
H
Halfe Communion no Sacrament.
484
An Hereticke defined.
195
Hierarchiall Church.
55.57
Honorius Angustudonensis, of the iniqui­tie of Romists.
112
Humane Historie no rule of Faith.
128, 131
I
Idololatrie.
269
Indulgences and Popes Pardons a late deuise, 562. granted for many thou­sand yeeres.
564
Images and their Worship.
206.212
Images of the Trinitie.
265
Images a snare to the simple.
267
Influence of Christ into Workes, ma­keth them not meritorious.
515.516
Inuocation of Saints.
288
S. Iohn chap. 20. vers. 23. Whose sinnes you remit, &c.
191
Iustifying Faith.
162
K
The Kingdome of Christ deuided with the Virgin Marie.
362
Kings may bee deposed by Popes and Bishops, is the Doctrine of many Pontificians.
575
L
Latria or diuine Worship.
241
Liturgie in a strange tongue.
365
Liuing Saints, & Prayers to them.
333
M
Manner of Presence in the Eucharist.
391.406
Math. 16.18. Vpon this Rocke, &c.
3
Math. 22.37. Loue the Lord with all thy heart.
523
Math. 26. Drinke ye all of this.
488.492
Math. 28.20. I will be with you alwayes, &c.
94.99
Merit of Workes.
172.511
Merits of Saints deceased.
240
Mediator supreame and subordinate.
336
Miracles.
85.102
[Page] Mother Church.
126
Mother of mercie.
361
N
Nicene second Councell.
247
O
Omnipotencie.
181.446
Oblations to Saints.
348
Opposition to the Rom. Ch.
136
Ordination and Vocation of Pastors.
98
P
Penance no Sacrament. stricter in the Primitiue Church.
192. 539.
543
Penitentiarie taxe.
113
Popes no Lords of Purgatorie.
567
Popish Faith nouell.
129
Polidor Virgil of Images.
249
Prayer to Saints in set formes, &c.
352
Prayers in a knowne tongue, 366.373. on beades, 388. not meritorious.
548
Priuate Prayer in a knowne tongue.
383
Primacie of Peter.
157.570
Promise maketh not Workes merito­rious.
518
Punishment of chastisement.
540
Purging Authors.
125
Q
The Queene of Heauen.
363
R
Reading Scripture.
35.271.272.277.279
Reall presence.
178.395
Reason when to be beleeued.
438
Receiuing Scripture from the Church.
118
Religious honouring of Saints.
322
Repetitions of Creeds and Auees.
784
Reseruation of the Eucharist, 432. in both kinds.
505
Resolution of Faith.
13, 15, 20, 25, 31, 38, 47
Romane Church, 1, 2, 103, 145. a par­ticular Church, 109. not vniuersall, 111. not Catholicke, 201. a step­mother, 126. equall to other Chur­ches.
109.145
Romists want Apost. Traditions.
125 586
Romists causers of discord.
109
Rule of Faith.
[...]
S
Sacramentall vnion.
405
Saints not omniscient, 304. no Pro­phets, 312. in what manner like Angels, 317. no Patrons.
344
Sanctitie of the Church, 81, 101, 102. and want heereof in the Rom. Ch.
5, 57
Satisfaction,
534, 541, 544, 555, 575
Separation from the Rom. Ch.
106
Serapions Historie, about one kind.
503
Schisme.
107
Silence of Historie, no proofe of Faith vnchanged,
116, 131, 143, 144, 255
Spirituall presence.
396
Spirituall eating and drinking.
184
Scripture how proued Diuine. 24, 30: the Mouth and Hand of God. 91. Sufficiencie thereof, 37, 43, 147. preserued incorrupt in all ages, 23, 117, 124. wherein obscure, 35, 45. the translation thereof, 29. the ex­position and sense, 45, 121, 123. more fundamentall than Tradition vnwritten, 49, 90. Papists depresse Scripture.
92
Succession of Pastors, 65. of Romists,
115
Successor of Peter.
160
Supererogation.
522, 528
Supremacie Papall hath no ground in Scripture.
570
T
Tertullian of the Scripture. 9. of Indul­gences.
2. Timoth. 3. 15. &c.
39
Theoderit of Transubstantiation.
436
Titles of Canonicall Bookes.
19
Tradition.
45, 91, 93, 150, 151, 580
Transubstantiation, 390. not groun­ded on Scripture, 182, 447. the same defined, 419. Caietan, Scotus, &c. touching it.
182, 414
[Page] Transelementation.
421
Transmutation.
420
The Treasure of the Church.
552
V
Vasques about Adoration.
232
Vertues of iust persons.
170
The B. Virgin no dispencer of Grace, 357, 360. Halfe Christs King­dome.
361, 362
Visibilitie of the Church.
7, 50, 60, 96
Vniuersalitie.
74, 101
W
The Waldenses and Leonists,
105, 130, 139
Wicked persons no true Members of the Catholike Church.
53, 200
The wicked eat not Christs flesh.
407
Wine as necessarie as Bread in the Eu­charist.
471
Worship of Images.
209, 228, 241
FINIS.

Escapes in Printing.

FOl. 3. D. for [...], read [...]. fol. 31. E. for immediately, read mediately. fol. 50. D. for [...], read [...]. fol. 49. C. for Pastres, read Pastors. fol 50. for [...], read [...]. ibid. D. after [...], insert [...]. fol 62 A. for Damascen, read [...]. fol. 62. B. for canta, read cauta. fol. 63. E. for innisible, read inuisible. fol. 70. for desensoris, read Aug. c. Petil. d. [...]. fol. 106 B. for redargurere, read redarguere. fol. 109 for vnde, read Otho Frising b. inde. fol. 117. C: for Agu­stine, read Augustine. fol. 127. Theoderit. A. for [...], read [...]. fol. 132 E. to law­fulnesse, adde whereof. fol. 138. Gregorie. F. for commissi, read commisi. fol. 150. Tho. Wald. F. for centia, read sentio. fol. 281. Vasq F. for contemplat, read contemplati. fol. 291. B. for first, read fift vniuersall Councell. fol. 300. A. for is expressely, read is not expressely. fol. 327. B. Alchasar, for ille, read illi. fol. 360. E. Stel. Cor. Mar. for animas, read animam. fol. 524. August. B. for praefect, read de perfectione. Ibid. Arausican. Concil. C. for gratiae, read gratia. Ibid. Bernard. d. for Notal. read Natal. Dom. fol. 527. August. C. for inuenire, read inuenies. fol. 557. F. for owards, read to­wards. fol. 559. Theoderit. D. for solutis, read salutis. fol. 560. A. for Guilliandus, read Guilli­audus. fol. 563. for Scoto, read Soto, m. fol. 564. A. Enchir. Sarisb. for vndecima, read vndecem.

AN ANSVVERE TO Mr FI …

AN ANSVVERE TO M r FISHERS Re­lation of a Third Confe­rence betweene a certaine B. (as he stiles him) and himselfe.

The Conference was very pri­uate, till M r FISHER spread certaine Papers of it, which in many respects deserued an Answere.

Which is here giuen by R. B. Chapleine to the B. that was imployed in the Conference.

LONDON, Printed by ADAM ISLIP.

1624.

[Page] TO THE READER.

THis which followes, though it needeth Patronage, as great as may be had; yet it is such, as may not presume to aske it: there­fore it thrusts it selfe to the End of these Labours, that it may seeme to haue the same Patron. I would haue put nothing before it, were it not necessarie you should know the Cause why the following Discourse was written; why it stayed so long, be­fore it looked vpon the Light; and why it is not able yet to goe alone, but is led abroad by this former Worke. The Cause why it was written, was this. A certaine B. (in the Iesuit's stile) was called and required to a May 24. 1622. Conference by Them that might command him. The Iesuit with whom hee had to deale, was M r Fisher. Hee began with great Protestations of seeking the Truth onely, and for it selfe. I would the B. could haue found it so. After the Conference ended (a great part of which time he spent, in reading a passage out of a Booke which himselfe had printed) the B. not suspecting any such thing, hee spread abroad Papers of the Conference, which were full of par­tialicie to his Cause, and more full of Calumnie against the B. Hereupon the B. deliuered me the Papers that were spread, and a Note what was mis-spread in them, to the vttermost of his Memorie, and other helpes. And I not departing from that, haue here entirely deliuered it to the vse of the Church.

There was a Cause also why it stayed so long, before it could endure to be pressed, and you must know that too. It was not my idlenesse, nor my vnwillingnesse, to right both the B. and his Cause against the Paper that was scattered: For I haue most Hono­rable Witnesses, that this Thing (such as it is) was finished long [Page] since: for the Papers came to my hand after Michaelmasse 1622. and J finished this Relation to them that Tearme. But the cause was partly mine owne backwardnesse to deale with these men: For they pretend onely for Truth and Vnitie, but will [...] neither, vnlesse they and their Faction may preuaile in all. Whereas it is a thing impossible, so many deuout and lear­ned men, in diuers Ages and Parts of the Church, should still pray, and sometimes call for a Reformation, if the Church had not warped at all, or if no And the Rom. Court, the great mi­sleader in all this. For in Iul. 3. time, the [...] of Trent not dissolued. Ru. Tapper in the pre­sence of Lindan with griefeacknow­ledges, Abusus Ro. Curiae enex­cusabiles, Inexcu­sable abuses of the Court of Rome. O­rat. 10. Reformation were necessarie. And partly because there were about that time, three Conferen­ces with M r. Fisher, Two, at which the worthie Authour of this fore-going Discourse was present. This was the Third, and therefore could not well and conueniently come into the world, till the two former (vpon which it somewhat depended) had shewed themselues.

And the Cause why it cannot yet goe alone, but is led into publicke by this former Worke, is, because before those Nine Ar­ticles there goeth a Preface, which together with some of the Articles themselues are the mayne and substance of all that pas­sed in the Two former Conferences; and so they are fittest to take this Third by the hand, and lead it forth.

J haue thus farre acquainted you with the Occasion of the ensuing discourse. J haue beene a faithfull Relator of all passa­ges, and the B, protests hee hath beene faithfull in relating to me. But J cannot but [...] (and hee hath And hee that hath hard Bowells is a stranger to God, who in other things, (and so in the di­stractions and suffe­rings of his Church, much more) is [...] Bonorum viscerū Deus. S. Iaco. 5. 11 Et Hypol. Orat de cōsummat. Mund. Pia Mosis viscera. S. Aug. ser. 18. de verb. Dom. c. 21. d. Phil. 2.21. hard Bowells that grieues not) to see Christendome bleeding in dissention: Nay, which is farre worse, triumphing in her owne blood, and most angry with them that study her Peace. Jn the meane time there are Sua, their owne things, which S. Paul tells vs, All men seeke, and not the things that are Iesus Christs. And Religi­on, so much pretended and called vpon; and the Church, the Church, so much honoured in name; are but the stalking horse, other Fowle are shot at Complaint is but a seeming ease of wea­ker spirits: it can helpe nothing; And since it cannot, vse these Pa­pers for a little support: It may be these may giue some stay till God giue stronger. So I leaue you to be indifferent between the B. and M. Fisher: and for my selfe, I shall haue reward enough, if you pray for Peace and Truth in the Church, and so for me.

Yours in Christ, whom I labour to serue, R. B.

A These are M. Fi­shers owne words, in the Paper by him spread; as also all that follow the Letter F. BRIEFE RELA­TION OF WHAT PASSED in a third priuate CONFERENCE, betweene a certaine B. and me, BEFORE &c.
ANSVVERED BY R. B. Chaplaine to the B.

I hope you will pardon the B. if iust occasion hath spunne my Answer for him to Longiore morâ opus est, vt soluas quaestionem, quam vt proponas. Sen. Ep. 48. length.

F.

The Occasion of this Conference, was.

B.

THE Occasion of this third Conference you should know sufficiently; you were an Actor in it, as well as the rest. Whether you haue rela­ted the two former truly, ap­peares by D r Whites Relation, or Exposition of them. The B. was present at none, but this third, of which he is readie by me to giue the Church an ac­count. [Page 2] But of this third, whether that were the cause which A you alledge, he cannot tell: You say,

F.

(It was) obserued, That in the second Conference, all the speech was about particular matters; little, or none, about a continuall, infallible, visible Church, which was the chiefe and onely Point (in which the person doubting) required satisfaction: as hauing formerly settled their mind, That it was not for them or any other vnlearned B persons to take vpon them to iudge of particulars, with­out depending vpon the Iudgement of the true Church.

B.

The opinion of that person in this, was neuer opened to the B. And it is very fit the people should looke to the Iudgement of the Church, before they be too busie with parti­culars. But yet neither 1. Cor. 10. 15. Quis non sine vllo Magistro aut inter­prete, ex se facile cognoscat, &c. No­uat. de Trin. c. 23. (& loquitur de mysterio Passionis Christi.) Scripture, nor any good Authoritie, denyes them some moderate vse of their owne vnderstanding and iudgement, especially in things familiar and euident, which euen ordinarie Capacities may as easily vnderstand, as reade: C And therefore some particulars a Christian may iudge, with­out depending.

F.

(That person) therefore hauing heard it granted in the first Conference, That there must be a continuall visible Companie euer since Christ, teaching vnchanged Doctrine in all fundamentall Points, that is, Points necessarie to Saluation; desired to heare this confirmed, and proofe brought, which was that continuall, infallible, visible D Church, in which one may, and out of which one cannot attaine Saluation. And therefore hauing appointed a time of meeting betweene a B. and me, and thereupon hauing sent for the B. and me, before the B. came (the doub­ting persons) came first to the roome where I was, and debated before me the aforesaid Question; and not doub­ting of the first part, to wit, That there must be a conti­nuall visible Church, as they had heard graunted by E D r White and L. K. &c.

B.

What D r White and L. K. graunted, neyther the B. nor I heard. But I thinke, both graunted a continuall and a visible Church; neyther of them an infallible, at least in your sense. [Page 3] And your selfe, in this Relation, speake distractedly: For in A these few Lines from the beginning hither, twice you adde in­fallible betweene continuall and visible, and twice you leaue it out. But this concerneth D r W. and he hath answered it.

F.

The Question was, Which was that Church? (One) would needs defend, That not onely the Romane, but also the Greeke Church was right.

B.

When that Honourable Personage answered, I was not by to heare. But I presume hee was so farre from graunting, B that onely the Romane Church was right, as that he did not graunt it right: and that hee tooke on him no other defence of the poore Greeke Church, than was according to Truth.

F.

I told him, That the Greeke Church had plainely chan­ged and taught false, in a Point of Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost; and that I had heard say, that euen his Maiestie should say, That the Greeke Church hauing erred against the Holy Ghost, had lost the Holy Ghost. C

B.

You are very bold with his Maiestie, to relate him vpon hearesay. My intelligence serues me not, to tell you what his Maiestie said: but if hee said it not, you haue beene too cre­dulous to beleeue, and too suddaine to report it. Princes de­serue, and were wont to haue more respect than so. If his Ma­iestie did say it, there is truth in the speech; the error is yours onely, by mistaking what is meant by loosing the Holy Ghost. For a particular Church may be said to loose the Holy Ghost two wayes, or in two degrees: The one, when it looses such spe­ciall D assistance of that blessed Spirit, as preserues it from all dangerous errors, and finnes, and the temporall punishment which is due vnto them: And in this sense, the Greeke Church lost the Holy Ghost; for they erred against him, they sinned a­gainst God: and for this, or other sinnes, they were deliuered into another Babylonish Captiuitie vnder the Turke; in which they yet are, and from which God in his mercie deliuer them. The other is, when it looses not onely this assistance, but all assistance ad hoc; to this, that they may remaine any longer a true Church. And so Corinth, and Ephesus, and diuers others, E haue lost the Holy Ghost. But in this sense, the whole Greeke Church lost not the Holy Ghost; for they continue a true Church in substance, to and at this day, though erroneous in the point which you mention.

F.
[Page 4]

(The said person) not knowing what to answer, called A in the B. who sitting downe first, excused himselfe, as one vnprouided, and not much studied in Controuersies, and desiring, that in case he should faile, yet the Protestant Cause might not be thought ill of.

B.

The B. indeed excused himselfe, and he had great reason so to doe. But his Reason being grounded vpon his Modestie for the most part, he is willing I should let you insult at your B pleasure. This onely by the way: It may be fit others should know, the B. had no information, where the other Conferen­ces brake off; no instruction, what should be the ground of this third Conference; nor the full time of foure and twentie houres, to bethinke himselfe: whereas you make the sifting of these and the like Questions to the very Branne, your dayly worke, and came throughly furnished to the businesse. Saint Augustine De [...] Cred. cap. 2. said once, Scio me inualidum esse, I know I am weake; and yet he made good his Cause. And the B. prefer­ring the Cause before his Credit, was modest and reasonable: C For there is no reason, the weight of that whole Cause should rest vpon any one particular; and great reason, that the perso­nall defects of any man should presse him, but not the Cause.

F.

It hauing a hundred better Schollers to maintaine it, than he. To which I said, There were a thousand better Schollers than I, to maintaine the Catholike Cause.

B.

The B. in this had neuer so poore a conceit of the Prote­stants D Cause, as to thinke they had but a hundred better than he, to maintaine it. That which hath a hundred, may haue as many more, as it pleases God to giue, and more than you. And the B. shall euer be glad, that the Church of England (which at this time, if his memorie reflect not amisse, he named) may haue farre more able defendants than himselfe: he shall neuer enuie them, but reioyce for her. And hee makes no question, but that if hee had named a thousand, you would haue multiplyed yours into ten thousand, for the Catholike Cause, as you call it. And this confidence of yours hath euer beene fuller of noyse, E than proofe. But you admonish againe.

F.

Then the Question about the Greeke Church being pro­posed, I said as before, that it had erred.

B.
[Page 5]

Then I thinke the Question about the Greeke Church was A proposed. But after you had with confidence enough not spa­red to say, That what the B. would not acknowledge in this cause, you would wring and extort from him; then indeed you said as before, that it had erred: And this no man denyed. But euerie Error denyes not Christ, the Foundation; or makes Christ denie, it, or thrust it from the Foundation.

F.

The B. said, That the Error was not in Point funda­mentall.

B.

The B. was not so peremptorie. His speech was, That B diuers learned men, and some of your owne, were of opinion, That (as the Greekes expressed themselues) it was a Question not simply Fundamentall. The B. knowes and acknowledges that Error, of denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne, to be a grieuous Error in Diuinitie. And sure it would haue grated the Foundation, if they had so denyed the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne, as that they had made an inequali­tie betweene the Persons. But since their forme of speech is, Non ex [...] sed Spiritum [...] esse dicimus. Da­mascen. Lib. 1. Fid. Orth. c. 11. Et Pa­tris per Filium. Ib. That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Sonne, and is C the Spirit of the Sonne, without making any difference in the con­substantialitie of the Persons; the B. dares not denie them to be a true Church for this, though he confesses them an errone­ous Church in this particular.

Now that diuers learned men were of opinion, That à Filio, & per Filium, in the sense of the Greeke Church, was but a Question, in modo loquendi, in manner of speech Pluralitas in voce saluataê vnitate in re, non repugnat vnitati fidei. Durand. lib. 3. d. 25. q. 2., and therefore not fun­damentall, D is eui­dent. Magist. 1. Sent. D. 11. d. Sane sciendum est, quod licet in praesenti articulo a nobis Graeci verbo discordent, tamen sensu non differunt, &c. Bandinus, l. 1. de Trin. d. 11. & Bonauent. in 1. Sent. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. §. 12. Licet Graecis [...], quùm dixit Graecos obijcere [...] Romanis addendo (Filioque) quia sine huius Articuli professione salus erat, non respondet negando salutem esse, sed dicit tantum, opportunam fuisse determinationem propter periculum. Et po­stea, §. 15. Sunt qui volunt sustinere opinionem Graecorum & Latinorum, distin­guendo duplicem modum procedendi. Sed fortè si duo sapientes, vnus Graecus, alter Latinus, vterque verus amator ve­ritatis, & non propriae dictionis &c. de hac visa contrarietate disquirerent, pateret vtique tandem ipsam contrarietatem non esse veraciter realem, sicut est vocalis. Sco­tus, in 1. Sen. d. 11. q. 1. Antiquorum Graecorum à Latinis discrepantia in voce potius est, & modo explicandi Emanationem Sp. S. quam in ipsaê re &c. Iodocus Clichtouaeus in Damasc. L. 1. Fid. Orth. c. 11. Et quidam ex Graecis concedunt, quod sit à Filio, vel ab eo profluat. Thom. p. 1. q. 36. A. 2. C. Et Thomas ipse dicit Sp. S. procedere mediatè à Filio. Ib. A 3. ad 1. saltem ratione personarum spirantium. Respondeo cum Bessarione & Gennadio Damascenum non negasse Sp. S. proce­dere ex Filio quod ad rem attinet, quum dixerit [...] esse imaginem Filij & per Filium, sed existimasse [...] dici per Filium, quam ex Filio, quantum ad [...] Io­quendi, &c. Bellarm. lib. 2. [...] Christo, c. 27. §. Respondeo igitur, & Tollet. in S. Ioh. 15. Ar. 25. & Lutheran. Resp. ad Resp. 2. Ieremiae Patriarchae. The Master and his Schollers a­gree vpon it. The Greekes (saith hee) confesse the holy Ghost to be the Spirit of the Sonne, with the Apo­stle, Galat. 4. and the Spirit of Truth, E S. Ioh. 16. And since, Non est ali­ud, It is not another thing to say, The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne, [Page 6] then that he is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne; in this they A seeme to agree with vs in eandem Fidei Sententiam, vpon the same Sentence of Faith, though they differ in words. Now in this cause, where the words differ, but the sentence of Faith is the same, Eadem peni­tus Sententia, vbi supra Clichtou. [...] eadem, euen altogether the same, Can the Point be fundamentall? You may make them no Church (as Bellaram. 4. de Notis Eccl. cap. 8. Bellar­mine doth) and so denie them saluation, which cannot be had out of the true Church; but the B. dares not.

It ought to be no easie thing, to condemne a man of Heresie, in foundation of Faith; much lesse, a Church; least of all, so ample and large a Church as the Greeke, especially so, as to B make them no Church. Heauen Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes, when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne Girdle: And it is good counsaile which Alphonsus à Ca­stro Lib. 3. contra Haeres. fol. 93. A., one of your owne, giues; Let them consider, that pronounce easily of Heresie, how easie it is for themselues to erre. Or if you will pronounce, consider what it is that seperates from the Church simply, and not in part onely. I must needs professe Iunius Animad­in Bellarm. Cont. 2. l. 3. c. 23., that I wish heartily, as well as o­thers, that those distressed men, whose Crosse is heauie al­readie, had beene more plainely and moderately dealt with­all, C though they thinke a diuerse thing from vs, than they haue beene by the Church of Rome. But hereupon you say you were forced.

F.

Whereupon I was forced to repeat what I had for­merly brought against Dr. White, concerning Points Fundamentall.

B.

Hereupon it is true, that you read a large discourse out of a Booke printed, which you said was yours. The particulars D (all of them at the least) the B. tells me, he doth not now re­member, and is sure he did not then approoue. But if they be such as were formerly brought against [...] White, they are by him formerly answered. The first thing you did, was the righ­ting of S. Augustine F. First righting the Sentence of S. Austine, Ferendus est disputator er­rans, &c.: Which Sentence the B. doth not at all remember was so much as named in the third Conference, much lesse was it stood vpon, and then righted by you. Ano­ther place of S. Augustine indeed was (which you omit) but the place of it comes after, about Tradition, to which I remit it. But you tell vs of a great proofe made out of this place F. By which is prooued, That all Points defined by the Church, are fun­damentall.. E

These words containe two Propositions: One, That all Points defined by the Church, are Fundamentall; The other, That this is prooued out of this place of S. Augustine.

1. For the first, That all Points defined by the Church, are Funda­mentall. [Page 7] It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to A her Greatnesse, to blast euerie Opposer shee had, with the name of Heretike, or Schismatike; for this serued to shriuell the credit of the persons: and the persons once brought into contempt, and ignominie, all the good they desired in the Church, fell to dust, for want of creditable persons to backe and support it. To make this proceeding good in these later yeeres, this course (it seemes) was taken. The Schoole, that must maintaine (and so they doe) That all Points defined by the Church, are thereby Your owne word. Fundamentall, Inconcussâ fide ab omnibus. Thom 2.2. q. 1. Art. 10. C. necessarie to be beleeued, Scotus, 1. sent. d. 11. q. 1. of the substance of the Faith, and that, though it be determined quite Ecclesiae vo­ces etiam extra Scripturam. Stap. Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. Quae maturo iudicio definiuit, &c. solidum est, & etiamsi nullo scrip­turarum aut eui­denti, aut proba­bili testimonio cō ­firmaretur. Ibid. Extra Scrip­turam. B And then Et penes Cer­copes victoria sit. Greg. Naz. de diffe­ren. vitae. Cerco­pes 1. Astutos & veteratoriae impro­bitatis Episcopos, qui artibus suis ac dolis omnia Con­cilia perturbabant. Schol. ib. leaue the wise and actiue heads to take or­der, that there be strength enough readie to determine what is fittest for them.

But since these men distinguish not, nor you, betweene the Church in generall, and a Generall Councell, which is but her Re­presentation, for determinations of the Faith; the B. though he be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by law­full, generall, and consenting Authoritie; though hee giue as much as can be giuen to the definitions of Councels, truly ge­nerall: nay, suppose hee should graunt (which hee doth not) C That Generall Councels cannot erre, yet this cannot downe with him, That all Points euen so defined, are Fundamentall. For Deductions are not prime and Natiue Principles, nor are Su­perstructures, Foundations. That which is a Foundation for all, cannot be one, and another, in different Christians; for then it could be no constant Rule for any, nor could the soules of men rest vpon a shaking Foundation. No: If it be a true Foundation, it must be common to all, and firme vnder all; in which sense, the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall. And Quum enim vna & eadem fides sit, neque is qui multum de ipsa di­cere potest plusquā oportet dicit; neque qui parum, ipsam imminuit. Iren. li. 1. aduers. Haer. c. 3. Irenaeus layes this for a ground, That the whole Church (howsoeuer D dispersed in place) speakes this with one mouth. Hee which a­mong the Guides of the Church is best able to speake, vtters no more than this; and lesse than this, the most simple doth not vtter. Therefore the Creed (of which hee speakes) is a common, is a constant Foundation: and an Explicite Faith must be of this, in them which haue the vse of Reason; for both Guides and simple people, all the Church, vtter this.

Now many things are defined by the Church, which are but Deductions out of this: which, suppose them deduced right, mooue farre from the Foundation; without which Deductions, E explicitely beleeued, many millions of Christians goe to Hea­uen, and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the Faith. True Deductions from the Article, may require necessarie beleefe in them which are able, and doe goe along with them, from the [Page 8] Principle to the Conclusion: but I doe not see either that the A Learned doe make them necessarie to all, or any reason why they should: Therefore they cannot be Fundamentall.

Besides, that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ, is a Rocke immooueable, and can neuer bee varied: Neuer Resolutio Occham est, quod nec [...], nec [...] Generale, nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum, quod non suit Articulus. Sed in dubijs propositionibus potest Ecclesia [...] an sint Catholicae, &c. [...] sic determinando non [...], quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae determinationem, &c. Almain. in 3. D. 25. q. 1.. Therefore, if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it, it was Fundamentall before the definition; else it is mooueable, and then no Chri­stian hath where to rest. And if it be immooueable, as Regula fidei vna [...] est, sola illa im­mobilis & irreformabilis. Tertull. de [...]. vel. cap. 1. In hac fide, &c. nihil tran. mutare, &c. Athan. epist. ad Iouin. de fide. indeed it is, no Decree of a Councell, be it ne­uer so generall, can alter immooueable Verities, no more B than it can change immooueable Natures. Therefore, if the Church in a Councell define any thing, the thing defined is not Fundamentall, because the Church hath defined it; nor can be made so by the definition of the Church, if it be not so in it selfe. For if the Church had this power, shee might make a new Article of the Faith, Oc­cham, Almain. 3. sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selues denie: For the Articles of the Faith can­not encrease in substance, but onely in explication Thom. 2.2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C..

Nor is this hard to be prooued out of your owne Schoole; C for Scotus, in 1. Sent. d. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this verie particular of the Greeke Church: If there be (saith he) a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost, then either they or we be vere Haeretici, truly and indeed Heretikes. And he speakes this of the old Greekes, long before any decision of the Church in this Controuersie: For his in­stance, is in S. Basil, and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side, and S. Ierome, Augustine, and Ambrose, on the other. And who dares call any of these Heretikes? is his challenge. I denie not, but that Scotus addes there, That howsoeuer this was before, yet ex D quo, from the time that the Catholike Church declared it, it is to be held as of the substance of Faith. But this cannot stand with his former Principle, if hee intend by it, That whatsoeuer the Church defines, shall be ipso facto, and for that determinations sake Fundamentall. For if before the determi­nation (supposing the difference reall) some of those Wor­thies were truly Heretikes (as hee confesses) then somewhat made them so; and that could not be the Decree of the Church, which then was not: Therefore it must be some­what really false, that made them so; and fundamentally false, E if it had made them Heretikes against the Foundation. But Sco­tus was wiser, than to intend this. It may be hee saw the streame too strong for him to swim against, therefore hee went on with the Doctrine of the time, That the Churches Sen­tence [Page 9] is of the substance of Faith, but meant not to betray the A Truth; for hee goes no further than Ecclesia declarauit, since the Church hath de­clared it, which is the word that is vsed by diuers Bellarm. l. 2. de Conc. Auth. cap. 12. Concilia quùm definiunt, non fa­ciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis, sed declarant. Explicare, Bonauent. in 1. D. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad finem. Explanare, declarare, Th. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. & 2. 2. q. 1. A. 10. ad 1..

Now the Sent. 1. D. 11. Master teaches, and the Aib. Mag. in [...] Sent. D. 11. Art. 7. Schollers too, That euerie thing which belongs to the exposition or declaration of another, intus est, is not another contrarie thing, but is contay­ned within the bowels and nature of that which is interpre­ted: from which, if the declaration depart, it is faultie and er­ronious, B because in stead of declaring, it giues another and a contrarie Nos semper nec quicquam prae­tereà. Vin. Lir. c. 32. sense. Therefore, when the Church declares any thing in a Councell, either that which she declares, was Intus, or Extra, in the nature and veritie of the thing, or out of it. If it were Extra, without the nature of the thing declared; then the declaration of the thing is false, and so, farre from being fundamentall in the Faith In noua haeresi veritas prius erat de fide etsi non ita declarata. Scotus, in 1. D. 11. q. 1. in fine. Haeretici multa quae erant implicita fi­dei nostrae compu­lerunt explicare. Bonauent. in 1. D. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad finē. Thom. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2.. If it were Intus, within the com­passe and nature of the thing, though not expert and appa­rant to euerie Eye; then the declaration is true, but not other­wise fundamentall, than the thing is which is declared: For Intus C cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is; if it were, it could not be Intus. Therefore nothing is simply fundamentall, be­cause the Church declares it, but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares.

And it is a slight and poore euasion that is commonly vsed, That the declaration of the Church makes it fundamentall, quoad nos, in respect of vs; for it doth not that neither: for no respect to vs, can varie the Foundation. The Churches de­claration can bind vs to peace, and externall obedience, where there is not expresse letter of Scripture and sense agreed on; D but it cannot make any thing fundamentall to vs, that is not so in the nature of it. For if the Church can so adde, that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be fundamentall in the Faith, that was not, then it can take a thing from the foundation, and make it by declaring, not to be fundamentall; which all men graunt, no power of the Church can doe: For the power of adding any thing contrarie, and of detracting any thing necessa­rie, are alike Deut. 4.2. Tho. Suppl. q. 6. A. 6. C. forbidden. Now nothing is more apparant than this to the eye of all men, That the Church of Rome hath determined, or declared, or defined (call it what you will) very E many things, that are not in their owne nature fundamentall, and therefore neither are, not can be made so, by her adiudging them.

2. For the second, That it is prooued by this place of S. Au­gustine, [Page 10] That all Points defined by the Church, are fundamentall. A You might haue giuen me that place cited in the Margin, and eased my paines to seeke it; but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it: For you doe so extraordinarily right this place, that you were loth (I thinke) any [...] should see how you wrong it. The place of S. Augustine is this, against the Pe­lagians, about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants: August. Serm. 14. de verb. Apost. c. 12. Fundata res est. In alijs quaesti­onib' non diligen­ter digestis, non­dum plenaê Ecclesiae authoritate [...] ferendus est dis­putator errans: ibi ferendu; est Error, non tantum pro­gredi debet, vt eti­am fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae qua­tere moliatur. This is a thing founded; An erring Disputor is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested, not yet made firme by [...] Autho­ritie of the Church, their Error is to be borne with: but it ought not to goe so farre, that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe B of the Church. This is the place: but it can neuer follow out of this place (I thinke) That euerie thing defined by the Church, is Fundamentall.

For first, he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture, not a Church definition. This appeares: for few Lines before he tells vs, Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question mooued to S. Cyprian, Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight day, as well as Circumcision? And no doubt was made then of the Origine [...]. beginning of Sinne, and that Ex eaê re vnde nulla erat quaestio, [...] est exorta quaestio. out of this thing about which no Question was mooued, that Questi­on that was made, was answered. And Hoc de Fun­damento Ecclesiae sumpfit ad confir­mandum Lapidem nutantem. againe, That S. Cyprian C tooke that which he gaue in answere, from the Foundation of the Church, to confirme a Stone that was shaking. Now S. Cyprian, in all the Answer that he giues, hath not one word of any defi­nition of the Church: therefore Ea Res, That thing by which he answered, was a Foundation of prime and settled Scripture Doctrine, not any definition of the Church: Therefore, that which he tooke from the Foundation of the Church, to fasten the Stone that shooke, was not a definition of the Church, but the Foundation of the Church it selfe, the Scripture, vpon which it builded: as appeareth in the Concil. Mile­uit. c. 2. Mileuitan Councell; D where, the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned, is the Rule of Rom. 5.15. Scripture, Rom. 5.12. Therefore S. Augustine goes on in the same sense, That the Disputor is not to be borne any longer, that shall Vt Funda­mentum ipsum Ec­clesiae quatere mo­liatur. endeuour to shake the Foundation it selfe, vpon which the whole Church is grounded.

Secondly, If S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foun­dation, the definition of the Church, because of these words, This thing is founded, This is made firme by full authoritie of the Church, and the words following these, To shake the foundation of the Church; yet it can neuer follow out of any, or all these E Circumstances (and these are all That all Points defined by the Church, are Fundamentall in the Faith. For first, no man denyes, but the Church is a 1. Tim. 3.15. Foundation; That things defined by it, are founded vpon it: And yet hence it cannot follow, That [Page 11] the thing that is so founded, is Fundamentall in the Faith; for A things may be Mos fundatissi­mus. S. Aug. ep. 28. founded vpon humane Authoritie, and be verie certaine, yet not Fundamentall in the Faith: Nor yet can it follow, This thing is founded, therefore euerie thing determined by the Church, is founded. Againe, that which followes, That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Au­thoritie of the Church, cannot conclude they are therefore fundamentall in the Faith: For full Church Authoritie, is but Church Authoritie; and Church Authoritie, when it is at full Sea (the time that included the Apostles, being past, and not comprehended in it) is not simply Diuine Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 3. A. 1.: therefore the Sen­tence B of it not fundamentall in the Faith. And yet no erring Disputor may be endured to shake the Foundation which the Church in Councell layes: But plaine Scripture, with euident sense, or a full demonstratiue argument, must haue roome, where a wrangling and erring Disputor may not be allowed it. And there's neither of these but may conuince the definition of the Councell, if it be ill founded. And the Articles of the Faith may easily prooue it is not fundamentall, if in deed and veritie it be not so.

And the B. hath read some bodie, that sayes (Is it not you?) C That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes: One, in their Matter, such as are all things as be so in themselues; the other, in the Manner, such as are all things that the Church hath defi­ned, and determined to be of Faith: And that so, some things that are de modo, of the manner of being, are of Faith. But in plaine truth, this is no more, than if you should say, Some things are fundamentall in the Faith, and some are not. For wrangle while you will, you shall neuer be able to prooue, That any thing which is but de modo, a consideration of the manner of being onely, can possibly be fundamentall in the Faith. D

And since you make such a Foundation of this place, I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you; it is a venture but I shall find it Ezech. 13.11. vntempered. Your assertion is, All Points defi­ned by the Church, are fundamentall: your proofe, this place, Because that is not to be shaken, which is setled Plenaê [...] Authoritate. by full authoritie of the Church. Then it seemes your meaning is, that this Point there spoken of, The remission of [...] sinne in Baptisme of Infants, was defined, when S. Augustine wrote this, by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell. First, If you say it was, Lib. 2. de Aut. Conc. c. 5. A solis particularibus. Bellarmine will tell you it is false; and that the Pelagian Heresie was neuer condemned in an E Oecumenicall Councell, but only in Nationalls. But Bellarmine is deceiued: for while they stood out impudently against Na­tionall Councels, some of them defended Nestorius; which gaue occasion to the first Can. 1. & [...]. Ephesine Councell to excommuni­cate [Page 12] and depose them. And yet this will not serue your turne A for this place: For S. Augustine was then dead, and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place. Secondly, And if you say it was not then defined in an Oecu­menicall Synod, plena Authoritas Ecclesiae, the full Authoritie of the Church, there mentioned, doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell, but for some Nationall; as this was condemned in a Concil. Mile­uit. Can. 2. Nationall Councell: and then the full Authoritie of the Church here, is no more than the full Authoritie of this Church of Nay, if your owne Capellus bee true, De Apell. Eccl. Afric. c. 2. n. 5. It was but a Prouin­ciall of Numidia, not a Plenarie of Africke. Africke. And I hope that Au­thoritie B doth not make all Points defined by it, to be Funda­mentall: You will say, Yes, if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope. And I must euer wonder why S. Augustine should say, The full Authoritie of the Church, and not bestow one word vpon the Pope, by whose Authoritie onely that Councell, as all other, haue their fulnesse of Authoritie, in your iudgement. An inexpiable omission, if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true.

F.

Secondly, J required to know what Points the B. would account Fundamentall. Hee said, All the C Points of the Creed were such.

B.

Against this, I hope you except not. For since the Tertull. Apol. contra gentes, c. 47. de [...]. Virg. cap. 1. S. August. Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. [...] in [...]. apud Cypri­anum, p. 357. Fa­thers make the Creed the Rule of Faith, Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles, are the two Regular Pre­cepts by which a Diuine is gouerned, about the Faith; since your owne Concil. Trid. Sess. 3. Councell of Trent decrees, That it is that Principle of Faith, in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree, Et Fundamentum firmum & vnicum, not the firme alone, but the onely Foundation; since it is Excommunication [...]. ibid. Dub. 2. & 3. in Li­teram. ipso iure, for D any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed; since the whole body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed, as that the Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. A. 7. C. substance of it was beleeued euen before the com­ming of Christ, though not so expressely, as since in the num­ber of the Articles; since Bellarmine 4. de verb. Dei, non Scrip. cap. 11. confesses, That all things simply necessarie for all mens saluation, are in the Creed and the Decalogue: What reason can you haue to except? And yet for all this, euerie thing Fundamentall is not of a like neere­nesse to the Foundation, nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith. And the B. graunting the Creed to be Fundamentall, doth not E denie, but that there are Ibid. Thom. Quaedam prima Credibilia, Certaine prime Principles of Faith, in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded vp: One of which, since Christ, is that of S. Iohn 1. Ioh. 4. 2., Euery Spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ [Page 13] come in the flesh, is of God: And one, both before the comming A of Christ, and since, is that of S. Paul Heb. 11.6., He that comes to God, must beleeue that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him.

F.

I asked, How then it happened, as M r Rogers saith, that the English Church is not yet resolued, what is the right sense of the Article of Christ's descending into Hell.

B.

The English Church neuer made doubt (that I know) what was the sense of that Article. The words are so plaine, they B beare their meaning before them. Shee was content to put that Article Art. 3. among those, to which she requires subscription, not as doubting of the sense, but to preuent the Cauills of some, who had beene too busie in crucifying that Article, and in ma­king it all one with the Article of the Crosse, or but an Exposi­tion of it.

And sure the B. thinkes, and so doe I, That the Church of England is better resolued of the right sense of this Article, than the Church of Rome; especially if she must be tryed by her Writers, as you trie the Church of England by M r Ro­gers. C For you cannot agree, whether this Article be a meere Tradition, or whether it hath any place of Scripture to warrant it. In 1. D. 11. q. [...]. Scotus and Rel. Con. 5. q. 5. A. 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture; but 4. de Christo, c. 6. & 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent. Bellarmine is resolute, that this Article is euerie where in Scripture; and 2.2. q. 1. A. 9. ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed. The Church of England neuer doubted it, and S. Augustine Epist. 99. prooues it.

And yet againe you are different for the sense: For you a­gree not, whether the Soule of Christ, in triduo mortis, in the time of his death, did goe downe into Hell really, and was pre­sent D there; or virtually, and by effects onely: For Th. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. C. per [...] essentiam. Thomas holds the first, and Dur. in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand holds the latter. Then you agree not, whether the Soule of Christ did descend really, and in es­sence, into the lowest Pit of Hell, and place of the Damned, as L. 4. de Christo, c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable, and prooued it; or really only into that place or Region of Hell, which you call Limbum Pa­trum, and then but virtually from thence into the Lower Hell: to which Recogn. p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe, and giues his reason, because it is the Sequuntur [...] Tho. p. 3. q 52. A. 2. common opinion of the Schoole. Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the E Creed, and beleeues them, without further dispute, and in that sense which the antient Primitiue Fathers of the Church a­greed in. And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolued in the sense of this Article, Is it not as [Page 14] lawfull for them to say, (I conceiue thus, or thus, of it; yet if any A other way of his Descent be found truer than this, I denie it not, but as yet I know no other) as it was for In 3. D. 22. q. 3. n. 9. Durand to say it, and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith?

F.

The B. said, That M r Rogers was but a priuate man. But (said I) if M r Rogers (writing as he did by publike Authoritie) be accounted onely a priuate man, &c.

B.

The B. said truth, when he said M r Rogers was a priuate man. And I take it, you will not allow euerie speech of euerie B man, though allowed by Authoritie to be printed, to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome. This hath beene oft com­plained of on both sides, The imposing particular mens Asserti­ons vpon the Church: yet I see, you meane not to leaue it. And surely, as Controuersies are now handled (by some of your partie) at this day, I may not say it is the sense of the Ar­ticle in hand, but I haue long thought it a kind of descent into Hell, to be conuersant in them. I would the Authors would take heed in time, and not seeke to blind the people, or cast a mist be­fore euident Truth, least it cause a finall descent to that place C of Torment. But since you hold this course, Stapleton was of greater note with you, than Rogers is with vs; and as he, so his Relection: And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which he affirmes, Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell, and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church? If it be, then what will become of the Pope's Supremacie ouer the whole Church? Shall hee haue his power ouer the Catho­like Church giuen him expressely in Scripture, in Matth. 16.19. the Keyes to enter, and in Ioh. 21.15. Pasce, to feed when he is in; and when he hath fed, to Luc. 22.32. confirme; and in all these, not to erre and faile in his mi­nistration: D And is the Catholike Church, in and ouer which he is to doe all these great things, quite left out? Belike, the Holy Ghost was carefull to giue him his power; Yes, in any case; but left the assigning of his great Cure, the Catholike Church, to Tradition: And it were well for him, if hee could so prescribe for what he now claymes.

But what if after all this, M r Rogers there sayes no such thing? as in truth he doth not. His words are: Rogers, in Art. Eccl. Angl. Art. 3. All Christi­ans acknowledge he descended; but in the interpretation of the Ar­ticle, there is not that consent that were to be wished. What is this E to the Church of England, more than others? And againe, Ibid. Till wee know the natiue and vndoubted sense of this Article, is M r Rogers (Wee) the Church of England? or rather, his and some others Iudgement of the Church of England?

F.
[Page 15]

But if M r Rogers be onely a priuate man; In what A Booke may wee find the Protestants publike Doctrine? The B. answered, That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne.

B.

What, was the B. so ignorant, to say, The Articles of the Church of England were the publike Doctrine of all the Protestants? or, That all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England, as this speech seemes to implie? Sure he was not. Was not the immediate speech before, of the Church of England? And B how comes the subiect of the speech to be varyed in the next Lines? Nor yet speake I this, as if other Protestants did not a­gree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines against which they ioyntly take exceptions against the Romane Church, as appeares by their seuerall Confessions. Nor did the B. say, That the Booke of Articles onely was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine: Shee is not so narrow, nor hath shee purpose to exclude any thing which shee acknowledges hers; nor doth shee wittingly permit any cros­sing of her publike declarations: Yet shee is not such a Shrew C to her Children, as to denie her Blessing, or denounce an Ana­thema against them, if some peaceably dissent in some particu­lars, remoter from the Foundation, as your owne Schoolemen differ. And if the Church of Rome, since shee grew to her great­nesse, had not beene so fierce in this course, Christendome (I persuade my selfe) had beene in happier peace at this day.

F.

And that the Scriptures onely, not any vnwritten Tra­dition, was the Foundation of their Faith.

B.

The Church of England grounded her Positiue Articles D vpon Scripture; and her Negatiue Refute, where the thing af­firmed by you, is not affirmed in Scripture, nor directly to be concluded out of it. And since you are pleased before to passe from the Church of England to all Protestants, you may know for your comfort, that all Protestants agree most strongly in this, That the Scripture is suf­ficient to salua­tion, and con­taines E in it all things necessa­rie to it. The Fathers S. Bas. l. de vera & pia fide. Manifesta defectio fidei est importare quicquam eorum quae scripta non sunt. S. Hilar. l. 2. ad Const. Aug. Fidem tantum secundum ea, quae scripta sunt desiderantem, & hoc qui repudiat, Antichristus est, & qui simulat Anathema est. S. Aug. lib. 2. de Doctr. Christian. c. 9. In ijs quae apertè in Scripturaê posita sunt, inueniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque viuendi. And to this place, Bel­larm. l. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto, c. 11. saith, That S. Augustine speakes de illis dogma­tibus quae necessaria sunt omnibus simpliciter; of those points of Faith which are necessarie simply for all men. So farre then he grants the Question. And that you may know it fell not from him on the suddaine, he had said as much before in the beginning of the same Chapter, and here he confirmes it againe. are [Page 16] plaine; the Scotus. Proleg. in Sent. q. 2. Scrip­tura sufficienter continet Doctrinam neces­satiam viatori. Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. A. 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi & Apostolorum veritas fidei est sufficienter explicata: & loquitur ibi de verbo scripto V. & N. Testamenti. Schoolemen not strangers in it. A And haue not wee reason then to account it as it is, The Foundation of our Faith? And Scripturam Fundamentum esse & Columnam fidei fatemur in suo genere, i. in genere testimoniorum, & in materia cre­dendorum. Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. in fine. Staple­ton himselfe, though an angrie Opposite, con­fesses, That the Scripture is in some sort the Foun­dation of Faith, that is in the nature of Testimonie, and in the matter or thing to be beleeued. And if the Scripture be the Foundation to which wee are to goe for Witnesse, if there be doubt about the Faith, and in which we are to find the thing that is to be beleeued, as necessa­rie in the Faith; we neuer did nor neuer will refute any Tradition B that is Vniuersall and Apostolike, for the better exposition of the Scripture; nor any definition of the Church, in which she goes to the Scripture for what shee teaches, and thrusts nothing as fundamentall in the Faith vpon the world, but in what the Scrip­ture is Materia Credendorum, the substance of that which is to be beleeued, whether immediately and expressely in words, or more remotely, till a cleare and full deduction draw it out.

F.

I asked, How he knew Scripture to be Scripture; and in particular, Genesis, Exodus, &c. These are beleeued C to be Scripture, yet not prooued out of any place of Scrip­ture. The B. said, That the Bookes of Scripture are Prin­ciples to be supposed, and needed not to be prooued.

B.

I did neuer loue too curious a search into that which might put a man into a Wheele, and circle him so long be­tweene proouing Scripture by Tradition, and Tradition by Scripture, till the Deuill find a meanes to dispute him into In­fidelitie, and make him beleeue neither. I hope this is no part D of your meaning: yet I doubt, this Question, How doe you know Scripture to be Scripture? hath done more harme, than you will be euer able to helpe by Tradition. But I must follow that way which you draw me. And because it is so much insisted vpon by you, and is it selfe a matter of such consequence, I will sift it a little further.

Many men labouring to settle this great Principle in Diuinitie, haue vsed diuers meanes to prooue it. All haue not gone the same way, nor all the right way. You cannot be right, that re­solue Faith of the Scriptures, being the Word of God, into E onely Tradition; for onely and no other proofe, are equall. To prooue the Scripture therefore (so called by way of Excel­lence) to be the Word of God; first, some flye to the Testi­monie and Witnesse of the Church, and her Tradition, which [Page 17] constantly beleeues, and vnanimously deliuers it: secondly, A some to the Light and the Testimonie which the Scripture giues to it selfe, with other internall proofes which are obserued in it, and to be found in no other Writing whatsoeuer: thirdly, some to the Testimonie of the Holy Ghost, which cleares vp the Light that is in Scripture, and seales this Faith to the soules of men, that it is Gods Word: fourthly, All that haue not im­brutished themselues, and sunke below their Species and order of Nature, giue euen Naturall Reason leaue to come in, and make some proofe, and giue some approbation, vpon the weighing and the consideration of other Arguments.

1. For the first: The Tradition of the Church taken and B considered alone, it is so farre from being the onely, that it can­not be a sufficient proofe to beleeue, by Diuine Faith, That Scripture is the Word of God: for that which is a full and sufficient proofe, is able of it selfe to settle the soule of man, concerning it. Now the Tradition of the Church is not able to doe this: for it may be further asked, Why he should be­leeue the Churches Tradition? And if it be answered, Because the Church is infallibly gouerned by the Holy Ghost, it may yet be demanded, How that may appeare? And if this be de­manded, C either you must say, you haue it by speciall Reuelation, which is the priuate Spirit, you obiect to other men; or else you must attempt to prooue it by Scripture, as all of you doe. And that very offer is sufficient acknowledgement, that the Scripture is a higher proofe than the Churches Tradition; which in your owne grounds, is or may be questionable, till you come thither.

Againe, if the Voice of the Church (saying, The Bookes of Scripture, commonly receiued, are the Word of God) be the formall Obiect of Faith, vpon which alone, and absolutely and lastly, I D may resolue my selfe; then euerie man not onely may, but ought, to resolue his Faith into the Voice or Tradition of the Church: for euerie man is bound to rest vpon the proper and formall Obiect of the Faith. But nothing can be more euident than this, That a man ought not to resolue his Faith of this Principle into the Testimonie of the Church: therefore neither is that Te­stimonie, or Tradi­tion, E the formall Obiect of Faith. The Vox Ecclesiae non est formale obiectum fidei. Stapl. Relect. Contr. 4. q. 3. A. 2. Licet in Articulo Fidei (Credo Ecclesiam) fortè contineatur hoc totum, Credo ea quae docet Ecclesia, tamen non intelligitur necessariò, quod Credo docenti [...] tanquam testi infallibili. Ibid. [...] reijcit [...] Durandi & Gabr. Et Waldens. lib. 2. Doctr. Fid. Art. 2. c. 21. Testimonium Ecclesiae Catholicae est obie­ctum Fidei Christianae, & Legislatio Scripturae Canonicae, subijcitur tamen ipsi sicut [...] Iudici, & Testimonium veritati, &c. Canus, Loc. lib. 2. c. 8. Nec si Ecclesia adi­tum nobis praebet ad huiusmodi [...] sacros cogn oscendos, protinus ibi acquies­cendum est, sed vltra oportet progredi, & solida Dei veritate niti, &c. Et Scolus, in 3. Dist. 23. q. 1. Learned of your owne part grant this: Although in the Article of the Creed [Page 18] (I beleeue the Catholike Church) peraduenture all this be contai­ned A (I beleeue those things which the Church teacheth) yet this is not necessarily vnderstood, That I beleeue the Church, teaching as an infallible Witnesse. And if they did not confesse this, it were no hard thing to prooue.

It seemes to me verie necessarie, that we be able to prooue the Bookes of Scripture to be the Word of God, by some Au­thoritie that is absolutely Diuine: for if they be warranted vnto vs by any Authoritie lesse than Diuine, then all things contay­ned in them (which haue no greater assurance than the Scrip­ture, in which they are read) are not Obiects of Diuine Beleefe. B And that once granted, will enforce vs to yeeld, That all the Articles of Christian Beleefe haue no greater assurance, than Humane or Morall Faith or Credulitie can affoord. An Autho­ritie then simply Diuine, must make good Scripture's Infallibi­litie. This Authoritie cannot be any Testimonie orVoice of the present Church: for our Hook. l. 3. §. 9. Worthies prooue, That all the Churches Constitutions are of the nature of humane Law: Stapl. Relect. Contr. 4. q. 3. A. 1. & 2. And some among you, not vnworthie for their Learning, prooue it at large, That all the Churches Testimonie, or Voice, or Sentence, (call it what you will) is but suo modo, or aliquo modo, not C simply, but in a manner Diuine. Now that which is Diuine but in a manner, be it the Churches manner, is suo modo non Diuina, in a sort not Diuine. But this great Principle of Faith (the ground and proofe of whatsoeuer else is of Faith) cannot stand firme vpon a proofe that is, and is not, in a manner, and not in a man­ner, Diuine; as it must, if wee haue no other Anchor than the externall Tradition of the Church.

2. For the second: That Scripture should be fully and suffi­ciently knowne, as by Diuine and infallible Testimonie, Lumine proprio, by the resplendencie of that Light which it hath in it D selfe onely, and by the witnesse that it can so giue it selfe; I could neuer yet see cause to allow. Hook. l. 2. §. 4. For as there is no place in Scripture that tells vs, such Bookes, containing such and such particulars, are the Canon and the infallible Will and Word of God; so if there were any such place, that were no sufficient proofe: for a man might iustly aske another Booke, to beare witnesse of that; and againe of that, another; and where euer it were written in Scripture, that must be a part of the whole. And no created thing can alone giue witnesse to it selfe, and E make it euident; nor one part testifie for another, and satisfie, where Reason will but offer to contest. Besides, if it were so cleare by [...] and in giuen Light, What should hinder, but that all which heare it, and doe but vnderstand the Tearmes, should presently assent vnto it, as men vse to doe to Principles euident in [Page 19] themselues? which dayly experience teacheth vs, they doe not. A And this, though I cannot approoue, yet me thinkes you may, and vpon probable grounds at least. For I hope no Romanist will denie, but that there is as much Light in Scripture, to mani­fest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God, as there is in any Tradition of the Church, that it is Diuine, and infallibly the vnwritten Word of God. And the Scriptures saying from the mouths of the Prophets, Isai. 44. & pas­sim. Thus saith the Lord, and from the mouths of the Act. 28.25. Apostles, That the Holy Ghost spake by them, are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Veritie, as the Church is to beare wit­nesse B to her owne Traditions, by bare saying they come from the Apostles: And your selues would neuer goe to the Scrip­ture, to prooue that there are Traditions, 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iud. vers. 3. as you doe, if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discouered by inbred Light in it selfe, as Traditions by their Light. And if this be so, then it is as probable at the least (which some of ours affirme) That Scripture may be knowne to be the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe, as it is (which In your Articles deliuered to D. W. to be answered. you affirme) That a Tradition may be knowne to be such, by the Light which it hath in it selfe. If this Argument were in ieast, this were C an excellent Proposition to make sport withall.

3. For the third: Either some thinke, that there is no suffi­cient warrant for this, vnlesse they fetch it from the Testimo­nie of the Holy Ghost, and so looke in vaine after speciall Reue­lations, and make themselues by thisvery conceit obnoxious, and easie to be led by all the whisperings of a seducing priuate Spirit; or else you would faine haue them thinke so: For your side, both vpon this and other occasions, doe often challenge, that wee resolue all our Faith into the Dictats of a priuate Spi­rit; from which wee shall euer prooue our selues as free, if not D freer than you. To the Question in hand then: Suppose it a­greed vpon, that there must be Vt testimonia Scripturae certam & indubitatam fidē praestent, necessari­um videtur often­dere, quod ipsae di­uinae Scripturae sint Dei Spiritu inspi­ratae. Orig. 4. [...]. a Diuine Faith, Cui subesse non potest falsum, vnder which can rest no possible error, That the Bookes of Scripture are the written Word of God: If they which goe to the Testimonie of the Holy Ghost for proofe of this, doe meane by Faith, Obiectum Fidei, The Obiect of Faith, that is to be beleeued; then no question they are out of the or­dinarie way: for God neuer sent vs, by any word or warrant of his, to looke for any such speciall and priuate Testimonie, to prooue which that Booke is that wee must beleeue. But if by E Faith, they meane the Habite or Act of Diuine infused Faith, by which vertue they doe beleeue the Credible Obiect, and thing to be beleeued; then their speech is true, and confessed by all Di­uines of all sorts. For Faith is the 1. Cor. 12.3, 4. S. Aug. in Psal. 87. gift of God, of God alone, [Page 20] and an infased Habite, in respect whereof, the Soule is meerely A recipient: And therefore the sole Infuser, the Holy Ghost, must not be excluded from that worke, which none can doe but he. For the Holy Ghost, as hee first dictated the Scripture to the A­postles Nec eum Ecclesiae testimonium aut [...] praed. [...] Dei Spiritum, vel ab [...] docente, vel à [...] bis audi­entious excludimus, sed vtro. iq disertè in ludimus, &c. [...]. Tript. [...]. Whi­tak. c. 3., so did he not leaue the Church in generall, nor the true members of it in particular, without grace to beleeue what himselfe had reuealed, and made credible. So that Faith, as it is taken for the vertue of Faith, whether it be of this or any o­ther Article, Fides quae caepit ab Ec­clesiae Testimonio [...] proponit & [...] ad [...], [...] in Deo intus [...], & intus [...] quod [...] Stapl. [...]. Contr. 4. q 3. a. 2. When graue and learned men doe sometimes hold, that of this Principle there is no proofe, but by the Testimonie of the Spirit, &c. I thinke it is not their meaning, to exclude all outward [...], &c. but rather this, That all other meanes are vneffectuall of [...] to worke Faith, without the speciall grace of God, &c. Hock. lib. 3. §. 8. though it receiue a kind of prepara­tion, or occasion of beginning, from the Testimonie of B the Church, as it proposes and induceth to the Faith, yet it ends in God, reuealing within, and teaching within, that which the Church preached without. For till the Spirit of God mooue the heart of man, he cannot beleeue, be the Obiect neuer so eredible. The speech is true then, but De habitu Fidei quoad fieri [...] & generationem quum à Deo immedi­atè solo Dono gratuito infusus est, [...] ad quaestionem, nisi quoad hoc quod per [...]. [...], &c. Henr. a [...]. Sum. a. 10. q. 1. D. quite out of the state of this Question, which enquires onely after a suf­ficient meanes to make this Obiect credible, and fit to be beleeued, against all impeachment of follic and temeritie in beleefe, whether men doe actually be­leeue C it, or not. For which, no man may expect inward priuate reuelation, without the externall meanes of the Church, vnlesse perhaps the Stapl. Rel. Cont. 4. q. 3. a. 2. doth not onely affirme it, but [...] too, à paritate [...], [...], case of necessitie, where there is no con­tempt of the externall meanes. case of necessitie be excepted, when a man liues in such a Time, and Place, as excludes him from all ordi­narie meanes, in which, I dare not offer to shut vp God from the soules of men, nor to tye him to those ordinarie wayes, and meanes, to which yet in great wisedome and prouidence hee hath tyed and bound all mankind.

Priuate Reuelation then hath nothing ordinarily to doe, to D make the Obiect credible in this, That Scripture is the Word of God, or in any other Article. For the Question is of such out­ward and euident meanes, as other men may take notice of, as well as our selues. By which, if there arise any doubting, or infirmitie in the Faith, others may strengthen vs, or we affoord meanes to support them: whereas the Quid cum sin­gulis agitur Deus, scit qui agit, & ipsi cum quibus [...] sciunt. Quid autem agatur cum genere humano, per histo­riam commendari voluit, & per [...]. S. Aug. L. de Vera Relig. c. 25. Testimonie of the Spirit, and all priuate Reuelation, is within, nor felt nor seene of any, but him that hath it; so that hence can be drawne no proofe to o­thers. Miracles are not sufficient alone to prooue it, [...] both E they and the Reuelation too, agree with the Rule of Scripture, which is now an vnalterable Rule by Gal. 1. 8. Man, or Angell.

4. The last, which giues Reason leaue to come in, and prooue what it can, may not iustly be denyed by any reasonable man. For though Reason, without Grace, cannot see the way [Page 21] to Heauen, nor beleeue this Booke, in which God hath written A the way; yet Grace is neuer placed but in a reasonable creature, and prooues by the verie seat which it hath taken vp, that the end it hath, is to be spirituall eye-water, to make Reason see what by Animalis ho­mo non percipit. 1. Cor. 2. 14. Nature onely it cannot, but neuer to blemish Reason in that which it can comprehend. Now the vse of Reason is verie ge­nerall; and man, doe what he can, is still apt to search and seeke for a Reason why he will beleeue, though after he once beleeues, his Faith growes stronger than either his Reason or his Know­ledge: and great reason for this, because it goes higher than ey­ther of the other can in this life. B

In this particular, the Bookes called the Scripture, are com­monly and constantly reputed to be the Word of God, and so infallible Veritie to the least Point of them. Doth any man doubt this? The World cannot keepe him from going to weigh it at the Ballance of Reason, whether it be the Word of God, or not. To the same Weights, he brings the Tradition of the Church, the inward motiues in Scripture it selfe, all Testi­monies within, which seeme to beare witnesse to it; and in all this, there's no harme: the danger is, when a man will vse no other Scale but Reason; for the Word of God, and the Booke contai­ning C it, refuse not to be weighed by Si [...] Rati­oni & veritat. [...] videntur, in precio habete, &c. de Mysterijs Religionis [...]. Martyr. Apol. 2. [...] si [...] Rationis, &c. Tertull. li de [...], c. 18. Rati­onabile est [...] Deum esse Autorē Scripturae. Henr. a Gand. Sum. q 9. q. 3. Reason: But the Scale is not large enough to containe, nor the Weights to measure out the true vertue and [...] force of either. Reason then can giue no supernaturall ground, into which a man may resolue his Faith, That Scripture is the Word of God infallibly; yet Reason can goe so high, as it can prooue that Christian Religion, which rests vpon the Authoritie of this Booke, stands vpon surer grounds of Nature, Reason, common Equitie, and Iustice, than any thing in the World, which any Infidell, or meere Naturallist, hath done, doth, or can adhere vnto, against it, in that which he makes, accounts, or D assumes, as Religion to himselfe. The antient Fathers relyed vp­on the Scriptures, no Christians more; and hauing to doe with Philosophers (men verie well seene in all the subtleties which naturall Reason could teach, or learne) they were often put to it, and did as often make it good, That they had sufficient warrant to relye as much as they did vpon Scripture. In all which Disputes, because they were to deale with Infidels, they did labour to make good the Authoritie of the Booke of God by such arguments, as vnbeleeuers themselues could not but thinke reasonable, if they [...] them with indifferencie. E Hook. lib 3. §. 8. Si Plato ipse [...], & me [...] non [...], &c. S. Aug. de vera [...]. c. 3. [...] Ratio potest pro­gredi à [...] ad inuisibilia, &c. Ibid. c. 29. And it is not altogether impossible to prooue it, euen by Reason, a Truth infallible, or else to make them denie some apparant Principle of their owne. For example: It is an apparant Principle, and with them, That God, or the absolute prime Agent, cannot be forced [Page 22] out of any possession: for if hee could be forced by another grea­ter, A he were neither Prince, nor Absolute, nor Si vim spectes, Deus valentissimus est. Aristot. de Mun­do, c. 7. Don. ini & moderatores omni­um. Cic. 2. de Leg. God, in their owne Theologie. Now they must graunt, That that God, and Christ, which the Scripture teaches, and wee beleeue, is the onely true God, and no other with him, and so denie the Deitie which they worshipped, or else denie their owne Principle about the Deitie, That God cannot be commanded, and forced out of possession: Ipse Saturnus, & [...], & Iupi­ter, & quicquid [...] colitis, victi dolore quod sunt [...]. Nec vti­que in turpitudinē sui nonnullis prae­sertim vestrorū as­sistentib' ment un­tur. Ipsis testib' esse eos Daemones de se verum confitentib' credite. [...] e­nim per [...] ve­rum & solum inuiti &c. Arnob. 8. contra Gent. For their Gods, Saturne, and Serapis, and Iupiter himselfe, haue beene adiured by the name of the true and onely God, and haue beene forced out of the bodies they possessed, and confessed themselues to be foule and seducing Deuils. And their confession was to be supposed B true, in point of Reason: for they that were adored as Gods, would ne­uer belie themselues into Deuils, to their owne reproach, especially in the presence of them that worshipped them, were they not forced. This, many of the vnbeleeuers saw; therefore they could not (in verie force of Reason) but they must either denie their God, or denie their Principle in Nature. Their long Custome would not forsake their God, and their Reason could not forget their Princi­ple. If Reason therefore might iudge among them, they could not worship any thing that was vnder command. And if it be reasonable to doe and beleeue this, then why not reasonable also C to beleeue that the Scripture is his Word, giuen to teach him­selfe and Christ, since there they find Christ S. Matth. 12.22. doing that, and S. Matth. 16.17. gi­uing power to doe it after, which themselues saw executed vpon their Deuill Gods?

Besides, whereas all other written Lawes haue scarce had the honour to be duly obserued, or constantly allowed worthie ap­probation in the particular places where they haue beene esta­blished for Lawes; this Law of Christ, and this Canon of Scrip­ture, the container of it, is or hath beene receiued in almost Si Libri quoquo modo se habent, sancti tamen Diuinarum rerum pleni propè totius generis humani confessione diffamantur, &c. S. Aug. de Vtil. Cred. c. 7. Scriptura summa dispositione prouiden­tiae super omnes omnium gentium literas, omnia sibi genera ingeniorum humano­rum Diuina Excellens authoritate subie­cit. S. Aug. 11. de Ciuit. Dei, c. 1. At in omni Orbe terrarum in omni Graecia & vniuersis Nationibus, innumeri sunt, & immensi qui relictis Patrijs, Legibus, &c. ad obseruantiam Mosis & Christi, &c. Origen. 4. [...], cap. 1. all Nations vnder Heauen: And wheresoeuer D it hath beene receiued, it hath beene both ap­prooued for vnchangeable Good, and beleeued for infallible Veritie. This persuasion could not haue beene wrought in men of all sorts, but by working vpon their Reason, vnlesse wee shall thinke all the World vnreasonable, that recei­ued it. And certainely, God did not giue this admirable facultie of Reasoning to the Soule of man, for any cause more prime than this, to discouer, or at least to iudge and allow of the E way to himselfe, when and howsoeuer it should be disco­uered.

One great thing that troubled Rationall men, was that which stumbled the Manichee (an Heresie it was, but more than halfe [Page 23] Pagan) namely, That somewhat must be beleeued, before much could A be knowne. Wise men vse not to beleeue, but what they know: And the Manichee Irridere in Ca­tholicae fidei disci­plina, quod iube­rétur homines cre­dere non autem, &c. S. Aug. 1. [...]. c. 14. scorned the Orthodox Christian, as light of beleefe, promising to lead no Disciple after him, but vpon euident knowledge. This stumbles many; but yet the Princi­ple, That somewhat must be beleeued, before much can be knowne, stands firme in Reason still: For if in all Sciences there be some Principles which cannot be prooued; if Reason be able to see this, and confesse it, if almost all Artists haue granted it, Who can iustly denie that to Diuinitie, A Science of the highest Obiect, God himselfe; which he easily and reasonably grants to inferior B Sciences, which are more within his [...] And as all Sciences suppose some Principles, without proouing; so haue they almost all, some Text, some Authoritie, vpon which they relye in some measure: and it is Reason they should. For though these make not their Texts infallible, as Diuinitie doth; yet full consent, and prudent examination, and long continuance, haue woon reputation to them, and settled reputation vpon them, verie deseruedly. For were these Texts more void of Truth than they are, yet it were fit to vphold their credit, that Nouices and young beginners in a Science, which are not yet able to C worke strongly vpon Reason, nor Reason vpon them, may haue Authoritie to beleeue, till they can learne to conclude from Principles, and so to know. Is this also reasonable in other Sci­ences, and shall it not be so in Theologie, to haue a Text, a Scripture, a Rule, which Nouices may be taught first to beleeue, that so they may after come to the knowledge of those things, which out of this rich Principle and And therefore S. Aug. 2. de Doctr. Christ. c. 8. would haue men make thē ­selues persect in rea­ding the letter of the Scripture, [...] before they vnderstood it. Eas notas habeat, etsi nondum intel­lectu, tamé [...] duntaxat; No que­stion, but to make thē readie, against they vnderstood it. Treasure are deduceable? I yet see not, how right Reason can denie these grounds; and if it cannot, then a meere naturall man may be thus farre conuin­ced, That the Text of God is a verie credible Text. D

Well, these are the foure, by most of which, men offer to prooue the Scripture to be the Word of God, as by a Diuine and infallible warrant; and it seemes no one of these doth it. The Tradition of the present Church is too weake, because that is not absolutely Diuine: The Light which is in Scripture it selfe, is not bright enough, it cannot beare sufficient witnesse to it selfe. The Testimonie of the Holy Ghost, that is most infallible, but ordinarily it is not so much as considerable in this Questi­on, which is not, how, or by what meanes we beleeue, but how the Scripture may be proposed as a credible Obiect, [...] for [...]. E And for Reason, no man expects, that that should [...] it; it doth seruice enough, if it enable vs to disprooue that which misguided men conceiue against it. If none of these then be an absolute and sufficient meanes to prooue it, eyther wee [Page 24] must find out another, or see what can be more wrought out A of these.

For the Tradition of the Church then, certaine it is, we must distinguish the Church, before wee can iudge right of the va­liditie of the Tradition. For if the speech be of the Prime Christian Church, the Apostles, Disciples, and such as had imme­diate Reuelation from Heauen; no question, but the Voice and Tradition of this Church is Diuine, not aliquo modo, in a sort, but simply; and the Word of God from them, is of like vali­ditie, written or deliuered. And against this Tradition (of which kind this, That the Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God, is the B most generall and vniforme) the Church of England neuer excepted. And then here's the Voyce of God, of which no Christian may doubt, to confirme his Word. For the Apostles had their Authoritie from Christ, and they prooued that they had it by apparant Miracles, which were beyond exception. And when S. Augustine L. 1. contr. Epis. Fund. c. 5. Ego vero non crederē Euan­gelio, nisi me Ca­tholicae Ecclesiae cō ­moueret autoritas. said, I would not beleeue the Gospell, vn­lesse the Authoritie of the Catholike Church mooued me (whichplace you vrged at the Conference, though you are now con­tent to slide by it) some of your ownewill not endure, should be vnderstood, saue [...], Dial. p. 1. l. 1. c. 4. [...] solum de Ec­clesia quae fuit tem­pore Apostolorum. of the Church in the time of the Apo­stles C onely; and Biel, Lect. 22. in C. Missae. A tempo­re Christi & Apo­stolorum, &c. And so doth S. Aug. take, Eccles cont. Fund. some, of the Church in generall, not [...] but sure to include Christ and his Apostles, the [...] is there.

But this will not serue your turne. The Tradition of the pre­sent Church must be as infallible as that of the Primitiue. But the contrarie to this is prooued before, because this Voyce of the present Church is not simply Diuine. To what end then serues any Tradition of the present Church? To what? Why to a very good end. For [...] it serues by a full consent to worke vpon the minds of vnbeleeuers; to mooue them to reade and to D confider, the Scripture (which they heare by so many wise, learned, and [...] men) as of no meaner esteeme than the [...] of God. It [...] among Nouices, Weakelings, and Doubters in the Faith, to instruct and confirme them, till they may ac­quaint themselues with, and vnderstand the Scripture, which the Church deliuers as the Word of God. And thus againe some of your owne vnderstand the fore cited place of S. Au­gustine, [...] the Gospell, &c. Siue Infideles, siue in fide Nouitij. Can. loc. lib. 2. cap. 8. [...] omni­no nescienti Scrip­turam. Stap. Relect. cont. 4. q. 1. A. 3. For he speakes it ey­ther of [...], or [...] in the Faith, or else of such as were in [...] [...]. You (as the B. tells me) at the Conference E (though you [...] it here) would needs haue it, that S. Augustine [...] of the Faithfull, which I cannot yet thinke: For hee speakes to the [...], and they had a great part of the [...] in them. And the words immediately before those, are, [Page 25] If thou shouldst find one, Qui Euangelio nondum credit, which did A not yet beleeue the Gospell, what wouldst thou doe to make him beleeue? Et ibid. Quibus obtemperaui dicē ­tibus Credite E­uangelio. Therefore he speaks of himselfe when he did not be­leeue. Ego vero non, Truly I would not, &c. So to these two ends it serues, and there need be no question betweene vs. But then euerie thing that is the first Inducer to beleeue, is not by and by either the principall Motiue, or the chiefe and last Obiect of Beleefe, vpon which a man may rest his Faith. The first knowledge that helpes to open a mans vnderstanding, and prepares him to be able to demonstrate a truth, and make it euident, is his Gram­mar: but when he hath made a Demonstration, he resolues the knowledge of his Conclusion, not into his Grammar Rules, but B into the immediate Principles out of which it is deduced. So in this particular, a man is probably led by the Authoritie of the present Church, as by the first informing, inducing, persuading meanes, to beleeue the Scripture to be the Wordof God: but when hee hath studied, considered, and compared this Word with it selfe, and with other Writings, with the helpe of ordi­narie Grace, and a mind morally induced, and reasonably per­suaded by the voyce of the Church; the Scripture then giues greater and higher reasons of credibilitie to it selfe, than Tra­dition alone could giue. And then he that beleeues, resolues his C last and full assent, That Scripture is Diuine Authoritie, into inter­nall Arguments, found in the Letter of it selfe, though found by the helpe and direction of Tradition without, and Grace within. And the Resolution that is rightly grounded, may not endure to pitch and rest it selfe vpon the helpes, but vpon that Diuine Light, which the Scripture no question hath in it selfe, but is not kindled, till these helpes come: Thy Word is a Light Psal. 119.105. Sanctarum Scrip­turarum Lumen. S. Aug. L. de Vera Relig. c. 7. Quid Lucem Scriptura­rum vanis vmbris? &c. S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cathol. c. 35.; so Dauid. A Light? therefore it is as much, manifestatiuum sui as alterius, a manifestation to it selfe, as to other things which it shewes: but still, not till the Candle be lighted; not till there D hath beene a preparing instruction, what Light it is. Children call the Sunne and Moone, Candles; Gods Candles: They see the Light as well as men, but cannot distinguish betweene them, till some Tradition, and Education, hath informed their Reason. And 1. Cor. 2.14. animalis homo, the naturall man sees some Light of Mo­rall counsaile and instruction in Scripture, as well as Beleeuers; but he takes all that glorious Lustre for Candle-Light, and can­not distinguish betweene the Suune, and twelue to the pound, till Tradition of the Church, and Gods Grace put to it, haue clea­red his vnderstanding. So Tradition of E the present Church, is the first motiue to Beleefe: but the Beleefe it selfe, That the Scripture is the Word of God, rests Orig. 4. [...], c. 1. went this way, yet was he a great deale neerer the prime Tradition, than wee are: for being to prooue, that the Scriptures were in­spired from God, be saith, De hoc assignabimus ex ipsis diuinis Scripturis, quae nos cōpetenter mouerint, &c. vpon the Scripture, when a man finds it to answere and exceed all that [Page 26] which the Church gaue in Testimonie. And as in the voyce of A the Primitiue and Apostolicall Church there was Principaliter tamen (eti­am & hic) credimus propter De­um non Apostolos, &c. [...]. à Gand. Sum. A. 9. q. 3. Now, if where the Apostles themselues spake, vltimata resolutio fidei, was in Deum, not in ipsos per [...], much more shall it be in [...], than in praesentem Eccle­siam; and into the writings of the Apostles, than into the words of their Successors, made vp into a Tradition. simply Diuine Authoritie, deliuering the Scripture as Gods Word; so, after Tradition of the present Church hath taught and informed the Soule, the voice of God is plainely heard in Scripture it selfe. And then here's double Authoritie, and both Diuine, that confirmes Scripture to be the Word of God, Tradi­tion of the Apostles deliuering it, and the internall worth and argument in the Scripture, obuious to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition, and Gods grace. B

The Difficulties which are pretended against this, are not many, and they will easily vanish.

1. First, you pretend wee goe to priuate Reuelations for Light, to know Scripture: No, wee doe not; you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question: and wee goe to the Tra­dition of the present Church, and by it as well as you. Here wee differ; wee vse this as the first Motiue, not as the last Resolu­tion of our Faith; wee resolue onely into Calu. Instit. 1. c. 5. §. 2. Christiana Ecclesia Propheta­rum, Scriptis, & A­postolorum praedi­catione initio fun­data fuit, vbicun (que) reperietur ea Do­ctrina, &c. prime Tradition Apo­stolicall, and Scripture it selfe.

2. Secondly, you pretend wee doe not, nor cannot know the C prime Apostolicall Tradition, but by the Tradition of the pre­sent Church; and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods vnwritten Word, and Diuine, we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture, by a Diuine Authoritie. First, suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Diuine, but by the present, yet it doth not follow, that then I cannot know Scripture to be Scripture by a Diuine Authoritie, be­cause Diuine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prooue it. For suppose I had not, nor could haue full assu­rance of Apostolicall Tradition Diuine, yet the morall per­suasion, D reason, and force of the present Church is ground e­nough to mooue any reasonable man, that it is fit hee should reade the Scripture, and esteeme very reuerently and highly of it. And this once done, the Scripture hath then In, and Home Arguments enough to put a soule, that hath but ordinarie Grace, out of doubt, That Scripture is the Word of God, infallible and Diuine. Secondly, Next, the present Tradition, though not absolutely Diuine, yet by the helpe of Diuine Arguments, in­ternall to the Scripture, is able to prooue the very prime Tradi­tion: for so long as the present agrees both with the prime E Tradition, and with the Scripture it selfe, deliuered by it (as in this it is found and agreed vpon, that it doth, and Hell it selfe is not able to belch out a good Argument against it) it is a suffici­ent testimonie of the Scriptures Authoritie; not by or of it selfe, [Page 27] because not simply Diuine, but by the prime Tradition and A Scripture vpon which it grounds, while it deliuers. And both these are absolutely Diuine.

3. Thirdly, you pretend, that wee make the Scripture ab­solutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo, by the Light and Testimonie which it hath in, and giues to it selfe. Against this, you giue reason and proofe from our selues. Your rea­son is, If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe, then euerie man that can and doth but reade it, may know it presently to be the Diuine Word of God; which we see by dayly experience, men neither doe nor can. First, it is not absolutely, nor vniuersally B true, There is sufficient Light; therefore euerie man may see it. Blind men are men, and cannot see it; and 1. Cor. 2.14. sensuall men, in the Apostles iudgement, are such: Nor may wee denie and put out this Light, as insufficient, because blind Eyes cannot, and peruerse Eyes will not see it, no more than we may denie meat to be sufficient for nourishment, though men that are heart-sicke, cannot eate it. Next, wee doe not say, That there is such a full Light in Scripture, as that euerie man vpon the first sight must yeeld to it; such Light as is found in prime Principles, Euerie whole is greater than a part of the same, and C this, The same thing cannot be, and not be, at the same time, and in the same respect. These carrie a naturall Light with them, and euident: for they are no sooner vnderstood, than fully knowne, to the conuincing of mans vnderstanding, and so they are the beginning of knowledge; which, where it is perfect, dwells in full Light: but such a full Light wee doe neyther say is, nor require to be in Scripture; and if any particular man doe, let him answere for himselfe. The Question is, onely of such a Light in Scripture, as is of force to breed Faith, that it is the Word of God; not to make a perfect Knowledge. Now D Faith, of whatsoeuer it is, this or other Principle, it is an Euidence [...]. Heb. 11. 1., as well as a Knowledge, and a Henr. à Gand. sum. A. 10. q. 2. firmer and surer Euidence than any Knowledge can haue, because it rests vp­on Diuine Authoritie, which cannot deceiue; whereas Know­ledge, or at least he that thinkes he knowes, is not euer cer­taine, in deductions from Principles. I say firmer Euidence, but not so cleare: For it is of Heb. 11.1. things not seene, in regard of the Obiect; and in regard of the Subiect that sees, it is in 1. Cor. 13.12. aenigmate, in a Glasse, or darke speaking. Now God E doth not require a full demonstratiue Knowledge in vs, that the Scripture is his Word, and therefore in his prouidence kin­dled in it no Light for that; but he requires our Faith of it, and such a certaine Demonstration, as may fit that. And for [Page 28] that, he hath left A sufficient Light in Scripture to Rea­son and Grace mee­ting, where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church; vnlesse you be of Bellar­mine's opinion Lib. 3 de Eccl. c. 14. Credere [...] esse Diuinas Scripturas non est omninò necessarium ad salutem. I will not breake my discourse, to [...] this speech of Bellar­mine; it is bad enough in the best sense that fauour it selfe can [...] it. For if he [...] by omninò, that it is not altogether, or simply necessarie to beleeue there is Diuine Scripture, and a written Word of God; that's false, that being granted which is among all Christians, That there is a Scripture: And God would [...] haue giuen a superna­turall vnnecessarie thing. And if he meanes by omninò, that it is not in any wise neces­sarie, then it is sensibly false: For the greatest vpholders of Tradition that euer were, made the Scripture verie necessarie in all the [...] of the Church. So it was necessarie, because it was giuen; and giuen, because God thought it necessarie. Besides, vpon Ro­man Grounds (if I haue skill enough to stand firme vpon them) this I thinke will follow: That which the Tradition of the present Church deliuers, as necessarie to [...], [...] om­ninò, necessarie to saluation: But that there are Diuine Scriptures, the Tradition of the present Church deliuers as necessarie to beleeue: therefore, to beleeue there are Diuine Scriptures, is omninò (be the [...] of the word what it can) necessarie to saluation. So Bellarmine is foule, and vnable to stand vpon his owne ground., B That to beleeue there are any Diuine Scriptures, is not omninò, necessarie to sal­uation.

The Authoritie which you pretend, is out of Lib. 1. §. 14. Hooker: Of things necessarie, the verie chiefest is to know, what Bookes wee are bound to esteeme holy; which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach. Of this, Protest. Apol. Tract. 1. §. 10. n. 3. Brierly (the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle, and yet seeme well read) tells vs, That Lib. 2. §. 4. Hooker giues a verie sensible Demonstration: It is not the Word of God, which doth or possibly can assure vs, that we doe well to C thinke it is his Word: for if any one Booke of Scripture did giue testi­monie to all, yet still that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest, would require another to giue credit vnto it. Nor could wee euer come to any pause, to rest our assurance this way: so that vnlesse, beside Scripture, there were something that might assure, &c. And Lib. 2. §. 7. & lib. 3. § 8. this he acknowledgeth (saith Brierly) is the Authoritie of Gods Church. Certainely, Hooker giues a true and a sensible Demonstration; but Brierly wants fidelitie and integritie, in citing him: For in the first place, Hookers speech is, Scripture it selfe cannot teach this; nor can the Truth say, that Scripture it selfe can. It must D needs ordinarily haue Tradition, to prepare the mind of a man to receiue it. And in the next, where hee speakes so sensibly, That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe, nor one part of it to another; that is grounded vpon Nature, which admits no created thing to be witnesse to it selfe; and is acknowledged by our Sauiour, S. Ioh. 5. 31. De seipso homine loquitur, nam aliter S. Ioh. 8.13. If I beare witnesse to my selfe, my witnesse is not true, i. not of force to be reasonably accepted for Truth. But then it is more than manifest, that Hooker deliuers his Demon­stration of Scripture alone. For if Scripture hath another proofe E to vsher it, and lead it in, then no question it can both prooue and approoue it selfe. His words are, So that vnlesse, besides Scripture, there be &c. Besides Scripture; therefore he excludes not Scripture, but calls for another proofe to lead it in, namely, [Page 29] Tradition, which no man that hath braines about him, denyes. A In the two other places, Brierly falsifies shamefully: for folding vp all that Hooker sayes, in these words, This (other meanes to assure vs, besides Scripture) is the Authoritie of Gods Church, he wrinkles that worthie Author desperately, and shrinkes vp his meaning. In the former place abused by Brierly, no man can set a better state of the question betweene Scripture and Tra­dition, than Hooker doth: Lib. 2. §. 7. His words are these, The Scripture is the ground of our Beleefe; The Authoritie of man (that is the name he giues to Tradition) is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture. I aske now, when a B man is [...], and hath viewed a house, and by viewing, likes it, and vpon liking, resolues vnchangeably to dwell there; doth he set vp his resolution vpon the Key that let him in? No sure; but vpon the goodnesse and commodiousnesse which he sees in the house. And this is all the difference (that I know) betweene vs in this Point: In which, doe you grant (as yee ought to doe) that wee resolue our Faith into Scripture, as the Ground, and wee will neuer denie, that Tradition is the Key that lets vs in. In the latter place, Hooker is as plaine, as constant to himselfe, and Truth: Lib. 3. §. 8. His words are, The first C outward motiue, leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture, is the Authoritie of Gods Church, &c. But afterwards, the more we bestow our labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof, the more we find, that the thing it selfe doth answer our receiued opinion concer­ning it: so that the former inducement preuailing somewhat with vs before, doth now much more preuaile, when the verie thing hath ministred further reason. Here then againe, in his iudgement, is Tradition the first inducement; but the farther Reason and Ground, is the Scripture: and resolution of Faith euer settles vpon the farthest Reason it can, not vpon the first inducement. So that the D state of this Question is firme and plaine enough, to him that will not shut his eyes.

The last thing I shall trouble you with, is, That this method and manner of proouing Scripture to be the Word of God, is the same which the antient Church euer held, namely, Tradition, or Ecclesiasticall Authoritie first, and then, internall Arguments from the Scripture it selfe. The first Church of Christ, the Apostles themselues, had their warrant from Nec ijs princi­paliter credendum [...] propter authori­tatem Christi, & Dei in Christo. Heur. [...] Gand. sum. a. 9. q. 3. Christ; their Tradition was euerie way Diuine, both in the thing they deli­uered, E and in the manner of their witnessing it. But in after­times of the Church, men prooue Scripture to be the Word of God by internall Arguments, as the chiefe thing vpon which they resolue, though Tradition be the first that mooues them [Page 30] to it. This way the Church went in S. Augustine's Lib. 13. contr. Faust. c. 5. Probat per internum argu­mentum impletio­nem Prophetarum. Scriptura quae fidē suā rebus ipsis pro­bat, quae per tem­porum successiones haec impleri, &c. Et Hen. à Gand. sum. a. 9. q. 3. citat S. Aug. L. de Vera Relig. in quo L. haec quatuor simul posita non le­guntur, sed adim­plent scopum [...]. time: A He was no enemie to Church-Tradition; yet when he would prooue, that the Author of the Scripture (and so of the whole knowledge of Diuinitie, as it is supernaturall) is Deus in Christo, God in Christ, he takes this as the all-sufficient way, and giues foure proofes, all internall to the Scripture: first, The Miracles; secondly, That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine; thirdly, That there hath beene such performance of it; fourthly, That by such a Doctrine of Humilitie, the whole World almost hath beene con­uerted. And whereas ad muniendam fidem, for the defending of the Faith, and keeping it entire, there are two things requisite, B Scripture, and Church-Tradition; Duplici modo munire fidem, &c. primò diuinae Legis [...], tum de­inde Ecclesiae Ca­tholicae traditione, contr. Haer. cap. 1. Vincent. Lirinensis places Au­thoritie of Scriptures first, and then Tradition. And since it is apparant, that Tradition is first in order of Time, it must necessa­rily follow, that Scripture is first, in order of Nature; that is the chiefe, vpon which Faith rests and resolues it selfe: And your owne Schoole confesses, this was the way euer. The wo­man of S. Ioh. 4. Samaria is a knowne resemblance, but allowed by your selues: For Henr. à Gand. sum. a. 10. q. 1. Sic quotidie apud illos qui foris sunt intrat Christus per [...], i. Ecclesiam & eredunt per istam famā &c. in Glos. in S. Ioh. cap. 4. quotidie, dayly with them that are without, Christ enters by the Woman, that is, the Church, and they beleeue by that fame which she giues, &c. But when they come to heare Christ him­selfe, C they beleeue his words, before the words of the woman. For when they haue once found Christ, Jbid. Plus ve­bis Chrsti in Scrip­tura credit, quam Ecclesiae testifican­ti. Quia propter il­lam iam credit Ec­clesiae, & si ipsa qui­dem [...] Scrip­turae diceret, ipsi non crederet, &c. they doe more beleeue his words in Scripture, than they doe the Church which testifies of him, be­cause then propterillam, for the Scripture they beleeue the Church: and if the Church should speake contrarie to the Scripture, they would not be­leeue it. Thus the Schoole taught then, and thus the Glosse com­mented then. And when men haue tyred themselues, hither they must come. The Key that lets men in to the Scriptures, euen to this knowledge of them, that they are the Word of God, is Tradition of the Church: but when they are in, In sacra Scrip­tura ipse immedia­tè loquitur fidelib'. Ibid. they D heare Christ himselfe immediately speaking in Scripture to the Faith­full: S. Ioh. 10.4. And his Sheepe doe not onely heare, but know his voyce.

To conclude then, wee haue a double Diuine Testimonie, alto­gether infallible, to confirme vnto vs, that Scripture is the Word of God: The first, is the Tradition of the Church of the Apo­stles themselues, who deliuered immediately to the World, the Word of Christ: the other, the Scripture it selfe; but af­ter it hath receiued this Testimonie. And E into these, wee doe and may safely re­solue our Faith. Quod autem [...] posterioribus circa quos non apparent [...] est, [...] quae illi in [...] Quae [...] medios [...] nullo fuisse [...] ex consensione con­cordi [...] succedentium vsque ad tempora [...]. Henr. à Gand. [...]. A. [...]. q. 3. Et [...] argumenta, quae [...] ex antedicto [...] S. Aug. [...] Dei [...], sufficientia debent esse indi­cia, non solum pro tempore Ecclesiae [...], sed etiam pro [...] Ecclesiae decursu vsque in [...], [...] de caetero non [...], &c. [...]. & Calu. Lib. 1. Instit. cap. 5. §. 2. [...] As for the Tradition of af­ter [Page 31] ages, in and about whom Miracles and Diuine power were not so A euident, we beleeue them, because they doe not preach other things than those former (the Apostles) left in scriptis certissimis, in most cer­taine Scripture. And it appeares by men in the middle ages, that these Writings were vitiated in nothing, by the concordant consent in them of all succeedors, to our owne time.

And now, by this time, it will be no hard thing to reconcile the Fathers, which seeme to speake differently in no few places, both one from another, and the same from themselues, tou­ching Scripture, and Tradition; and that as well in this Point, to prooue Scripture to be the Word of God, as for concordant B exposition of Scripture in all things else. When therefore the Fathers say, Scripturas ha­bemus ex Traditi­one. S. Cyril. Hier. Catech. 4. Multa quae non inueni­untur in Literis A­postolorum &c. non nisi ab illis tradita & commēdata cre­duntur. S. Aug. 2. [...] Baptis. contr. Do­nat. c. 7. Wee haue the Scripture by Tradition, or the like, ei­ther they meane the Tradition of the Apostles themselues de­liuering it; and there, when it is knowne, we may resolue our Faith: or if they speake of the present Church, then they meane, that the Tradition of it is that by which wee first receiue the Scrip­ture, as by an according meanes to the prime Tradition: But because it is not simply Diuine, wee resolue not our Faith into it, nor settle our Faith vpon it, till it resolue it selfe into the prime Tradition of the Apostles, or the Scripture, or both, and C there we rest with it. And you cannot shew an ordinarie con­sent of Fathers: nay, Can you, or any of your Quarter, shew me any one Father of the Church, Greeke or Latine, that euer said, Wee are to resolue our Faith, that Scripture is the Word of God, into the Tradition of the present Church? And againe, when they say wee are to relye vpon Scrip­ture Non aliunde Scientia Coelestium. S. Hilar. lib. 4. de Trin. Si Angelus de Coelo annunciauerit praeterquam quod in Scrip­turis, &c. S. Aug. l. 3. contr. [...]. c. 6. onely, they are neuer to be vnderstood with exclusion of Tradition, in what causes soeuer it may be had, Quum sit perfe­ctus Scripturarum Canon sibique ad omnia satis [...] suffi­ciat, &c. Vinc. Lir. cont. Haer. c. 2. And if it be sibi ad omnia, then to this, To prooue it selfe, at least aster Tradition hath pre­pared vs to receiue it. Not but that the D Scripture is abundantly sufficient to it selfe for all things, but because it is deepe, and may be drawne into different senses.

I haue said thus much vpon this great occasion, because this Argument is so much pressed, without due respect to Scrip­ture, I will not say, to the weakening our beleefe of it. Now out of this, I will weigh the B. his Answer, and your Exception taken against it.

F.

The B. said, That the Bookes of Scripture are Principles E to be supposed, and needed not to be prooued.

B.

Why, but did the B. say, That this Principle (The Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God) is to be supposed, as needing [Page 32] no proofe at all to a naturall man? or to a man newly entring A vpon the Faith? yea, or perhaps to a doubter, or weakeling in the Faith? Can you thinke the B. so weake? It seemes you doe. But sure hee knowes, that there is a great deale of diffe­rence betweene Ethnicks that denie and deride the Scripture, and men that are borne in the Church:The first haue a farther way about, to this Principle; the other, in their very Christian education sucke in this Principle, and are taught so soone as they are apt to learne it, That the Bookes commonly called the Bible, or Scripture, are the Word of God Dixi sicut ei congruebat ad qué Scribebam, &c. S. Aug. 1. Retrac. c. 13.. The B. dealt with you as with a Christian, though in Error while you call Catholike. The B words before spoken by the B. were, That the Scripture onely, not any vnwritten Tradition, was the Foundation of Faith. The Questi­on betweene vs and you is, Whether the Scripture doe con­taine all such necessarie things of Faith? Now in this Question, as in all Nature and Art, the Subiect, the Scripture is and must be sup­posed; the Quaere betweene the Romane Catholikes and the Church of England being onely of the Predicate, the thing vt­tered of it, namely, Whether it containe all Fundamentalls of Faith, all necessaries for Saluation, within it? Now since the Question proposed, in verie forme of Art prooues not, but supposes C the subiect, I thinke the B. gaue a satisfying answere, That to you and him, and in this Question, Scripture was a supposed Princi­ple, and needed no proofe. And I must tell you, that in this Question of the Scriptures perfect continent, it is against all Art, yea and Equitie too, in reasoning, to call for a proofe of that here, which must goe vnauoidably supposed in this Questi­on. De subiecto enim quaeritur semper, non subiectum ip­sum quam [...] in propositione. And if any man will [...] familiar with Impietie, to que­stion it, it must be tryed in a preceding Question and Dispute by it selfe. Yet here not you onely, but Lib 4. de verb. Dei, cap. 4. Bellarmine, and o­thers, run quite out of the way, to snatch at aduantage. D

F.

Against this, I read what I had formerly written in my Replie against M r Iohn White: wherein I plainely shewed, that this answere was not good, and that no o­ther answere could be made, but by admitting some Word of God vnwritten, to assure vs of this Point.

B.

Indeed here you read out of a Booke (which you called your owne) a large discourse vpon this Argument: but some E bodie told me the B. vntyed the Knot of the Argument, and set you to your Booke againe. Besides, you doe a great deale of wrong to M r Hooker Lib. 3. §. 8. and the B. that because they call it a supposed or presumed Principle among Christians, you should [Page 33] fall by and by into such a Metaphysicall discourse as the B. A tells me you did, to prooue, That that which is praecognitum, fore­knowne in Science, must be of such Light, that it must be knowne of and by it selfe alone; and that the Scripture cannot be so knowne to be the Word of God.

Well, I will not now enter into that discourse more than I haue, how farre the Beame, which is verie glorious (especially in some parts of Scripture) giues Light to prooue it selfe. You see neither Hooker, nor the B. nor the Church of England (for ought I know) leaue the Scripture alone, to manifest it selfe by the Light which it hath in it selfe, but when the present B Church hath prepared and led the way, like a preparing Morning-Light to Sunne-shine; and then indeed wee settle not, but in that Light. Nor will I make needlesse enquirie, how farre, or in what manner a praecognitum, or supposed Principle in any Sci­ence, may be prooued in a higher, to which that is subordinate; or accepted in a Prime: nor how it may in Diuinitie, where prae as well as post cognita; things fore as after-knowne, are mat­ters and vnder the manner of Faith, and not of Science strictly: nor whether a praecognitum, a presupposed Principle in Faith, which rests vpon Diuine Authoritie, must needs haue as much C and equall Light to Naturall Reason, which prime Principles haue in Nature, while thy rest vpon Reason: Nor whether it may iustly be denyed to haue sufficient Light, be cause not equall. Your owne [...]. p. 1. q. 1. A. 5. 1. colligitur inde. Schoole grants, That in vs, which are the subiects both of Faith and Knowledge, and in regard of the Euidence giuen in vnto vs, there is lesse Light, lesse Euidence in the Principles of Faith, than in the Principles of Knowledge, vpon which there can be no doubt. But I thinke the Schoole will neuer grant, that the Principles of Faith (euen this in question) haue not sufficient euidence. And you ought not to doe as you did, without any D distinction, or any limitation, denie a Praecognitum, or prime Prin­ciple in the Faith, because it answers not in all things to the prime Principles in Science, in their Light and Euidence; a thing in it selfe directly against Reason.

Well, though I doe none of this, yet I must follow you a little; for I would faine make it appeare as plainely as such a difficultie can, what wrong you doe Truth and your selfe in this case. When the Protestants therefore answere to this Argu­ment (which, as I haue shewed, can properly haue no place in the Question betweene vs about Tradition) Hook. l. 3. §. 8. they which E grant this as a Praecognitum, and thing fore-knowne, as the B. did, were neither ignorant nor forgetfull, That things presuppo­sed, as alreadie knowne in a Science, are of two sorts; Either they are plaine and fully manifest intheir owne Light, or they are [Page 34] prooued and granted alreadie, some former knowledge hauing made A them euident. This Principle then, The Scriptures are the Oracles of God, wee cannot say is cleare and fully manifest to all men simply, and in selfe-Light. For as is formerly said, if it were so euident, then all that heare it, reade it, and doe but vnderstand [...] tearmes, could not but presently assent vnto it, as they doe to Principles euident in themselues, which hourely experience tells vs is not so: Yet wee say, after Tradition hath beene our Introduction, the Soule that hath but ordinarie Grace added to Reason, may discerne Light sufficient to resolue our Faith, that the Sunne is there. This Principle then being not absolutely B and simply euident in it selfe, is presumed to be taught vs other­wise; and if otherwise, then it must be taught in and by some superior Science, to which Theologie is subordinate. Now men may be apt to thinke out of reuerence, That Diuinitie can haue no Science aboue it; but your owne Schoole teacheth me that it hath. Hoc modo sa­cra Doctrina est Scientia, quia pro­cedit ex principijs notis lumine supe­rioris Scientiae, quae scilicet est Scientia Dei & Beatorum. Th. p. 1. q. 1. a. 2. The sacred Doctrine of Diuinitie in this sort is a Science, because it proceeds out of Principles that are knowne by the Light of a superior Knowledge, which is the Knowledge of God and the blessed in Heauen. In this superior Science, this Principle, The Scriptures are the Oracles of God, is more than euident in full C Light. This superior Science deliuers this Principle in full re­uealed Light to the Prophets and Apostles: Non creditur Deus esse Author huius [...], quia homines hoc testa­ti sunt in quantum homines nudo Te­stimonio humano, sed in quantum [...] Diuina, & ita Deus ijs & sibi ipsi in eis Testimonium per­hibuit. Hen. à Gand. sum. A. 9. q. 3. The infallible Light of this Principle made their Authoritie Diuine; by the same Diuine Authoritie they wrote, and deliuered the Scripture to the Church. Therefore from them immediately the Church receiued the Scripture, and that vncorrupt: And since no suf­ficient reason hath or can be giuen, that in any substantiall thing it hath beene corrupted, it remaines firme to vs at this day, prooued in the most supreame Science; and therefore now to be supposed (at least by all Christians) That the Scripture is the D Word of God. And therefore the B. his answere is good euen in strictnesse, That this Principle is to be supposed.

Besides, the Iewes neuer had nor can haue any other proofe, that the Old Testament is the Word of God, than wee haue of the New: For theirs was deliuered by Moses, and the Pro­phets; and ours was deliuered by the Apostles, which were Prophets too. The Iewes did beleeue their Scripture by a Di­uine Authoritie; for so the Iewes argue themselues: S. Ioh. 9.29. We know that God spaeke with Moses; Maldon. in S. Ioh. 9. Itaque non magis errare posse eum sequentes, quā si Deum ipsum se­querentur. And that therefore they could no more erre in following Moses, than they could in following God E himselfe. Now, how did the Iewes know that God spake to Moses? How? Why apparently, the same way that is before set downe: first, by Tradition. So S. Chrysostome: Hom. 57. in S. Ioh. 9. [...]. We know: Why, by whose witnesse, doe you know? By the Testimonie of oùr An­cestors. [Page 35] But he speakes not of their immediate Ancestors, but A their Prime, which were Prophets, and whose Testimonie was Diuine; into which (namely, their Writings) the Iewes did resolue their Faith. And euen that Scripture of the Old Te­stament was a 2. Pet. 1.19. Light, and a shining Light too: and therefore could not but be sufficient, when Tradition had gone before. And therefore, though the Iewes entred this way to their be­leefe of the Scripture, yet they doe not say, S. Chrys. vbi su­pra. [...], &c. [...]. Audiuimus, Wee haue heard that God spake to Moses, but, Wee know it. So they resolued their Faith higher, and into a more inward Principle, than an Eare to their immediate Ancestors, and their B Tradition.

F.

And that no other answere could be made, but by ad­mitting some Word of God vnwritten, to assure vs of this Point.

B.

I thinke I haue shewed, that the B. his answere is good, and that so no other answere need be made. If there were need, I make no question but another answere might be made, to assure vs of this Point, though wee did not admit of any Word of C God vnwritten. I say, to assure vs; and you expresse no more. If you had said, to assure vs by Diuine Faith, your Argument had beene the stronger. But if you speake of assurance onely in the generall, I must then tell you (and it is the great aduan­tage which the Church of Christ hath against Infidels) a man may be assured, nay infallibly assured by Ecclesiasticall and hu­mane proofe. Men that neuer saw Rome, may be sure, and in­fallibly beleeue, that such a Citie there is, by Historicall and ac­quired Faith. And if consent of humane storie can assure me this, Why should not consent of Church-storie assure me the D other, That Christ and his Apostles deliuered this Bodie of Scripture as the Oracles of God? For Iewes, enemies to Christ, they beare witnesse to the Old Testament; and Christians, through almost all Nations Tanta hominū & temporum con­sensione firmatum. S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cath. c. 29. Ij Libri quoquo modo se habent, sancti ta­men Diuinarū rerū pleni propè totius generis humani [...] diffamātur, &c. S. Aug. de vtil. Cred. c. 7. & lib. 13. cont. Faust. c. 15., giue in euidence to both Old and New. And no Pagan, or other enemies of Christianitie, can giue such a worthie and consenting Testimonie for any Authoritie vpon which they relye, or almost for any Principle which they haue, as the Scripture hath gayned to it selfe. And as is the Testimonie which it receiues, aboue Super omnes omniū gentiū Lite­ras. S. Aug. 11. de Ciuit. Dei, c. 1. all Writings of all Nations; so here is assurance in a great measure, without any E Diuine Authoritie, in a word written or vnwritten. A great as­surance, and it is infallible too; onely then we must distinguish infallibilitie. For first, a thing may be presented as an infallible Obiect of Beleefe, when it is true, and remaines so: For Truth, [Page 36] [...] tale, as it is Truth, cannot deceiue. Secondly, a thing is A said to be infallible, when it is not onely true, and remainesso actually, but when it is of such invariable constancie, and vp­on such ground, as that no degree of falsehood at any time, in any respect, can fall vpon it. Certaine it is, that by humane Authoritie, Consent, and Proofe, a man may be assured infallibly, that the Scripture is the Word of God, by an acquired habite of Faith, Cui non [...] falsum, vnder which nor error nor false­hood is: But he cannot be assured infallibly by Diuine Faith, Incertum esse non potest hos esse libros Canonicos Wald. Doct. fid. l. 2. a. 2. c. 20. Cui subesse non potest falsum, into which no falsehood can come, but by a Diuine Testimonie. This Testimonie is abso­lute B in the Scripture it selfe, deliuered by the Apostles for the Word of God. That which makes way for this, as Canus, Loc. l. 2. c. 8. Facit Ecclesiam causam sine qua non. an Intro­duction and outward motiue, is the Tradition of the present Church; but that neither simply Diuine, nor sufficient alone, into which we may resolue our Faith.

And now to come close to the particular. The time was, be­fore this miserable rent in the Church of Christ (which I thinke no true Christian can looke vpon, but with a bleeding heart) that you and we were all of one beleefe: That beleefe was tainted, in tract and corruption of time, very deepely. C A diuision was made; yet so, that both parts held the Creed, and other common Principles of Beleefe: of these, this was one of the greatest, Inter omnes penè constat, aut certe id quod satis est, inter me & illos cum quibus nunc agitur conuenit hoc &c. Sic in alia causa cont. Mani­chaeos. S. Aug. l. de Mor. Eccl. Cathol. cap. 4. That the Scripture is the Word of God; for our beleefe of all things contained in it, depends vpon it. Since this diuision, there hath beene nothing done by vs to dis­credit this Principle: nay, we haue giuen it all honor, and ascri­bed vnto it more sufficiencie, euen to the containing of all things necessarie to saluation, with Vin. Lir. cont. Haer. c. 2. satis superque, enough, and more than enough; which your selues haue not done, doe not. And for begetting and settling a beleefe of this Principle, wee goe D the same way with you, and a better besides. The same way with you: because wee allow the Tradition of the present Church to be the first inducing motiue to embrace this Principle; onely wee cannot goe so farre in this way as you, to make the present Tradition alwayes an infallible Word of God: for this is to goe so farre in, till you be out of the way. For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church; it hath an end not onely to receiue vs in, but another after to let vs out into more open and richer ground. And a better way than you: Because after we are moo­ued, and prepared, and induced by Tradition, wee resolue our E Faith into that written Word, and God deliuering it, in which wee find the Tradition which led vs thither. And so wee are sure by Diuine Authoritie that wee are in the way, because at the end wee find the way prooued. And doe what can be [Page 37] done, you can neuer settle the Faith of man about this great A Principle, till you rise to greater assurance than the present Church alone can giue. And therefore once againe to that knowne place of S. Augustine Contr. Epist. Fund. c. 5.. The words of the Father are Nisi commoueret, Vnlesse the Authoritie of the Church mooued me: but not alone, but with other motiues; else it were not com­mouere, to mooue together. And the other motiues are Resoluers, though this be Leader. Now since wee goe the same way with you, so farre as you goe right, and a better way than you, where you goe wrong; wee need not admit any other Word of God, than wee doe. And this ought to remaine as a pre­supposed B Principle among all Christians, and not so much as come into this Question, about the sufficiencie of Scripture betweene you and vs.

F.

From this (the Person doubting) called vs, and desiring to heare, Whether the B. would graunt the Ro­mane Church to be the Right Church? The B. graunted, that it was. C

B.

One occasion which mooued Tertullian to write his Booke de Praescrip. aduersus Haereticos, was, That he Pamel. in Sum­mar. Lib. Videns disputationibus ni­hil aut parum pro­fici. saw little or no profit come by Disputations. Sure the ground was the same then, and now. It was not to denie, that Disputation is an opening of the Vnderstanding, a sifting out of Truth; it was not to affirme, that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe vnprofitable: If it had, S. Stephen Act. 6. 9. would not haue disputed with the Cyrenians, nor S. Paul with the Act. 9. 29. Grecians first, and then with the Iewes Act. 17. 17., and all Commers. No sure: it was some abuse in the Disputants, that frustrated the good of the Dis­putation. D And one abuse in the Disputants, is a Resolution to hold their owne, though it be by vnworthie meanes, and disparage­ment Debilitatur ge­nerosa indoles con­iecta in argutias. Sen. Ep. 48. of Truth. The B. finds it here. For as it is true, that this Question was asked; so it is altogether false, that it was asked in this forme, or so answered. There is a great deale of difference (especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church) betweene The Church, and A Church; and there is some, betweene a True Church, and a Right Church: which is the word you vse, but no man else that I know; I am sure, not the B. E

The Church may import in our Language, The onely true Church; and perhaps (as some of you seeme to make it) the Root and the Ground of the Catholike. This the B. neuer did, neuer meanes to graunt. A Church can imply no more, than [Page 38] that it is a member of the whole. This the B. neuer did, nor A euer will denie, if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church, he graunted also; but not a Right (as you impose vpon him:) For Ens and Verum, Being and True, are con­uertible one with another; and euerie thing which hath a Be­ing, is truly that Being which it is, in truth of substance. But this word Right is not so vsed, but is referred more properly to perfection in Conditions: And in this sense, euerie thing that hath a true and reall being, is not by and by right in the Conditions of it. A man that is most dishonest, and vnwor­thie the name, a verie Theefe (if you will) is a True man, in the B veritie of his essence, as he is a Creature endued with Reason; for this, none can steale from him, nor hee from himselfe, but Death: but hee is not therefore a right or an vpright man. And a Church that is exceeding corrupt, both in Manners and Doctrine, and so a dishonour to the name, is yet a True Church in the veritie of essence, as a Church is a companie of men, which professe the Faith of Christ, and are baptised into his Name: but yet it is not therefore a Right Church, eyther in Doctrine, or Manners. It may be, by this word Right, you meant cunningly to slip it in, that the B. should graunt it Or­thodoxe. C This hee neuer graunted you: For Orthodoxe Christi­ans are keepers of integritie, and followers of right things (so Saint Augustine Integritatis cu­stodes & Recta se­ctantes. De vera Relig. c. 5.) of which, the Church of Rome is neyther. In this sence then no Right, that is, Orthodoxe Church at Rome.

And yet no newes, that the B. graunted the Romane Church to be a True Church: For so much, verie learned Prote­stants Hook. lib. 3. §. 1. Iunius, lib. de Eccles. cap. 17. Fallantur qui Eccle­siam negant quia Papatus in ea est. Reynold. Thess. 5. Negat tantum esse Catholicam, vel sanum eius membrum. Nay, the verie Anabaptists graunt it. Fr. Iohnson in his Treatise called, A Christian Plea, printed 1617. pag. 123. &c. haue acknowledged, before him; and the Truth cannot denie it. For that Church which receiues the Scripture as a Rule of Faith, D though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule; and both the Sacraments, as instrumentall Causes and Seales of Grace, though they adde more, and misuse these; yet cannot but be a True Church in essence. How it is in Manners and Do­ctrine, I would you would looke to it with a single eye: Si tamen bono ingenio Pietas & Pax quaedam mentis acce­dat, fine qua de sanctis rebus nihil prorsus intelligi potest. S. August. de vtil. Cred. cap. 18. For if Pietie and a peaceable minde be not ioyned to a good vnderstanding, nothing can be knowne in these great things. E

F.

Further he confessed, That Protestants had made a Rent and Diuision from it.

B.

The B. (I know from himselfe) could here be hear­tily [Page 39] Grauè omninò crimen, sed defen­sionem longinquā non [...], satis est enim negare, si­cut pro Ecclesia o­lim. S. Aug. de vtil. Cred. c. 5. angrie, but that he hath resolued, in handling matters of A Religion, to leaue all gall out of his Inke, and makes me straine it out of mine. There is a miserable Rent in the Church, and I make no question but the best men doe most bemoane it Hanc quae re­spectu hominū Ec­clesia dicitur ob­seruare eiusq, com­munionem [...] debemus. Calu. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 7.: Nor is hee a Christian, that would not haue vnitie, might hee haue it with Truth. But the B. neuer said; nor thought, that the Protestants made this Rent. The cause of the Schisme, is yours; for you thrust vs from you, because wee called for Truth, and redresse of Abuses: For a Schisme must needs be theirs, whose the cause of it is. The Woe runs full out of the mouth of S. [...]. 18. 7. Christ, euer against him that giues the offence; B not against him that takes it, euer. But you haue giuen the B. iust cause, neuer to treat with you, or your like, but before a Iudge, or a Iurie.

F.

Moreouer, hee said, hee would ingenuously acknow­ledge, That the Corruption of Manners in the Romish Church, was not a sufficient cause to iustifie their de­parting from it. C

B.

I would the B. could say, you did as ingenuously re­peat, as hee did confesse. Hee neuer said, That Corruption of Manners was not a sufficient cause to iustifie their departure. How could he say this, since he did not graunt that they did depart? There is difference betweene departure, and cause­lesse thrusting from you; for out of the Church, is not in your power to thrust vs: Thinke on that. And so much the B. said expressely then. That which the B. did ingenuously confesse, was this, That Corruption in Manners onely, is no sufficient cause to Modo ea quae ad Cathedram perti­nent recta praeci­piant. Hier. ep. 236. make a seperation in the Church: Nor is it. It is a truth agreed D on by the Fathers, and receiued by Diuines of all sorts, saue by the Cathari, to whom came the Donatist, and the Anabaptist; against which, Lib. 4. c. 1. §. 13. &c. Caluin disputes it strongly. And Saint Augu­stine Ep. 48. A malis piscib' corde sem­per & moribus se­perantur, &c. Cor­poralem separatio­nem in litore Ma­ris, hoc est, in fine seculi expectat. is plaine: There are bad Fish in the Net of the Lord, from which there must be euer a seperation in heart, and in manners; but a corporall seperation must be expected at the Sea shore, that is, the end of the World. And the best Fish that are, must not teare and breake the Net, because the bad are with them. And this is as ingenuously confessed for you, as by the B. For if Corruption in Manners were a iust cause of actuall seperation of one Church E from another, in that Catholike Bodie of Christ, the Church of Rome hath giuen as great cause as any, since (as Vix vllū pecca­tū (solâ Haeresi ex­ceptâ) cogitari po­test, quo illa sedes turpiter maculata non fuerit, maximè ab an. 800. Relect. Cont. 1. q. 5. A. 3. Stapleton graunts) there is scarce any sinne that can be thought by man (He­resie onely excepted) with which that Sea hath not beene foulely stayned, [Page 40] especially from eight hundred yeeres after Christ. And he need not A except Heresie, into which In Can. Miss. Lect. 23. Biel grants it possible the Bishops of that Sea may fall. And In S. Luc. c. 22. L. 3. D. 24. q. 1. Stella and Almain grants it freely, that some of them did fall, and so ceased to be Heads of the Church; and left Christ (God be thanked) at that time of his Vicars Defection, to looke to his Cure himselfe.

F.

But (saith he) beside Corruption of Manners, there were also Errors in Doctrine.

B.

This the B. spake indeed: And can you prooue that he B spake not true in this? But the B. added (though here againe you are pleased to omit) That some of her Errors were dange­rous to saluation. For it is not euerie light Error, in dispu­table Doctrine, and Points of curious Speculation, that can be a iust cause of seperation, in that admirable Bodie of Christ, which is his Eph. 1.23. Church; for which he gaue his Naturall Bodie to be rent and torne vpon the Crosse, that this Mysticall Bodie of his might be One. And S. Augustine Ep. 50. inferres vpon it, That he is no way partaker of Diuine Charitie, that is an enemie to this Vnitie. Now what Errors in Doctrine may giue iust cause C of seperation in this Bodie, were it neuer so easie to deter­mine (as I thinke it is most difficult) I would not venture to set it downe, least in these times of Discord I might be thought to open a Doore for Schisme; which I will neuer doe, vnlesse it be to let it out. But that there are Errors in Doctrine, and some of them such as endanger saluation, in the Church of Rome, is euident to them that will not shut their eyes: The proofe whereof, runs through the particular Points that are betweene vs; and so it is too long for this discourse, which is growne too bigge alreadie. D

F.

Which when the generall Church would not reforme, it was lawfull for particular Churches to reforme them­selues. I asked Quo Iudice, Did this appeare to be so?

B.

Is it then such a strange thing, that a particular Church may reforme it selfe, if the generall will not? I had thought, and doe so still, That in point of Reformation of either Man­ners or Doctrine, it is lawfull for the Church since Christ, to E doe as the Church before Christ did, and might doe. The Church before Christ, consisted of Iewes and Proselytes: this Church came to haue a seperation, vpon a most vngodly Po­licie of 3. Reg. 12.27. [...], so that it neuer pieced together againe. [Page 41] To a Common Councell, to reforme all, they would not A come. Was it not lawfull for Iudah to reforme her selfe, when Israel would not ioyne? Sure it was, or else the Prophet de­ceiues me, that sayes exactly, Hos. 4. 15. Though Israel transgresse, yet letnot Iudah sinne. And S. Hierome Super Haereti­cis prona intelli­gentia est. S. Hier. ibid. expresses it in this verie pat­ticular sinne of Heresie and Error in Religion. Nor can you say, that Israel, from the time of the seperation, was not a Church, for there were true Prophets in it, 3. Reg. 17. sub Achabo. Elias, and 4. Reg. 3. sub lehoram, filio A­chabi. Elizaeus, and others, and 3. Reg. 19.18. thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal. And there was saluation for these; which cannot be, where there is no Church. And God threatens to Hos. 9. 17. cast them away, to wan­der B among the Nations, and be no Congregation, no Church: there­fore he had not yet cast them away into Non Ecclesiam, into no Church. And they are expressely called the people of the Lord in 4. Reg. 9.6. Iehu's time, and so continued long after. Nor can you plead, that Iudah is your part, and the Ten Tribes ours (as some of you doe:) for if that be true, you must graunt, that the Multitude and greater number is ours: And where then is Mul­titude, your numerous Note of the Church? But you cannot plead it: For certainely, if any Calues be set vp, they are in Dan and Bethel, they are not ours. C

Besides, to reforme what is amisse in Doctrine or Manners, is as lawfull for a particular Church, as it is to publish and pro­mulgate any thing that is Catholike in either. And your Que­stion, Quo iudice? lyes alike against both. And yet I thinke it may be prooued, that the Church of Rome, and that as a parti­cular Church, did promulgate an Orthodoxe Truth, which was not then Catholikely admitted in the Church; namely, The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne. If shee erred in this Fact, confesse her Error; if shee erred not, Why may not ano­ther Church doe as shee did? A learned Schooleman of yours D saith she may: Non oportuit ad hoc eos vocare quum authoritas fuerit publicandi a­pud Ecclesiam Ro­manam, praecipuè quum vnicui (que) etiā particulari Ecclesiae liceat, id quod Ca­tholicum est pro­mulgare. Alb. Mag. in 1. D. 11. A. 9. The Church of Rome needed not to call the Gre­cians to agree vpon this Truth, since the Authoritie of publishing it was in the Church of Rome, especially since it is lawfull for euerie particular Church to promulgate that which is Catholike. Nor can you say he meanes Catholike, as fore-determined by the Church in generall; for so this Point, when Rome added Filioque to the Creed of a Generall Councell, was nor. And how the Grecians were vsed in the after Councell (such as it was) of Florence, is not to trouble this Dispute; but Catholike stands there for that which is so in the [...] of it, and fundamen­tally. E Nor can you iustly say, That the Church of Rome did, or might doe this, by the Popes Authoritie [...] the Church. For suppose he haue that, and that his Sentence be infallible (I say suppose both, but I giue neither) yet neither his Authoritie nor [Page 42] his [...] can belong vnto him, as the particular Bishop of A that See, but as the Non errare conuenit Papae vt est caput. Bell. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. [...] Head of the whole Church. And you are all so lodged in this, that Li. 2. de Christo, c. 21. So you cannot find [...] of your [...] Truths, which are farre more likely to be kept: but when Errors are crept in, we must be bound to tell the [...], and the Time, & I know not what, of their Beginnings, or else they are not Errors. As if some Errors might not want a Record, as well as some Truth. Bellarmine professes he can neither tell the yeere when, nor the Pope vnder whom this Addition was made. A particular Church then, if you iudge it by the Schoole of Rome, or the Practise of Rome, may publish any thing that is Catholike, where the whole Church is silent; and may therefore reforme any thing that is not Ca­tholike, where the whole Church is negligent, or will not. But you are as iealous of the honour of Rome, as De Appel. Eccl. [...]. cap. 2. num. 12. Capellus is, who is angrie with Baronius about certaine Canons in the second Mi­leuitan B Councell, and saith, That he considered not of what conse­quence it was, to graunt to particular Churches the power of making Canons of Faith, without consulting the Romane See, which (as hee saith, and you with him) was neuer lawfull, nor euer done. But sup­pose this were so, the B. his speech was not, Not consulting, but in case of neglecting, or refusing.

Besides, you must be put in remembrance too, that the B. spake at that time (and so must all that will speake of that Exi­gent) of the Generall Church, as it was for the most part forced vnder the Gouernment of the Romane See: and this you vnder­stand C well enough; for in your verie next words you call it the Romane Church. Now I make no doubt, but that as the vni­uersall Catholike Church would haue reformed her selfe, had shee beene freed of the [...] yoake; so while shee was vnder that yoake, the Church of Rome was, if [...] the onely, yet the chiefe hinderance of Reformation. And then in this sense it is more than cleare, That if the Romane Church will neither reforme, nor suffer Reformation, it is lawfull for any particu­lar Church to reforme it selfe, so long as it doth it peaceably, and keepes it selfe to the Foundation. D

F.

Which Question I asked, as not thinking it equitie, that Protestants in their owne Cause should be Accusers, Wit­nesses, and Judges of the Romane Church.

B.

You doe well to tell the reason now, why you asked this Question; the B. sayes you did not [...] it [...] Confe­rence: if you had, you [...] receiued your An­swere. It is most true: No man in common [...] ought to E be suffered to be Accuser, Witnesse, and [...] in his [...]. But is there not [...] little [...], and [...] too, that any man that is accused, should be the Accused, and yet Witnesse and Iudge in his owne Cause [...] If the first may hold, no man shall [Page 43] be Innocent; and if the last, none will be Nocent. And what A doe we here with (in their owne Cause, against the Roman Church?) Why, is it not your owne too against the Protestant Church? And if it be a cause common to both, as certaine it is, then neither part alone may be Iudge: If neither alone may iudge, then either they must be iudged by a Third, which stands indif­ferent to both; and that is the Scripture. Or if there be a iea­lousie or doubt of the sense of Scripture, they must either both repaire to the Exposition of the Primitiue Church, and submit to that, or both call and submit to a Generall Councell, which fhall be lawfully called, and fairely and freely held, to iudge the B difference according to Scripture; which must be their Rule, as well as priuate mens.

F.

I also asked, Who ought to iudge in this case? The B. said, a Generall Councell.

B.

And surely, What greater or surer Iudgement you can haue, where sense of Scripture is doubted, than a Generall Coun­cell, I doe not see? Nor doe you doubt: for you adde, C

F.

I told him, That a Generall Councell, to wit, of Trent, had alreadie iudged, not the Romane Church, but the Protestants, to hold Errors. That (saith the B.) was not a lawfull Councell.

B.

It is true, that you replyed for the Councell of Trent. And the B. his answere was, not onely, That that Councell was not Legall, in the necessarie conditions to be obserued in a Ge­nerall Councell, but that it was no Generall Councell, which a­gaine D you are content to omit. Consider it well. First, Is that Councell Legall, the Abettors whereof maintaine publikely, That it is lawfull for them to conclude any Controuersie, and make it be de Fide, and so in your iudgement Fundamentall; though it haue not, I doe not say now the written Word of God for warrant, either in expresse Letter, or necessarie sense and deduction (as all vnerring Councels haue had, and as all must haue, that will not erre) but not so much as Etiamsi [...] cōfirmetur ne pro­babili Testimonio Scripturarū. Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. probable Testimonie from it; nay, quite Extra, without the Scripture? Nay more, Is that Councell Legall, where the Pope, the chiefe per­son E to be reformed, shall sit President in it, and be chiefe Iudge in his owne Cause, against all Law, Diuine, Naturall, and Hu­mane? In a place not free, but in or too neere his owne Domi­nion? To which all were not called, that had deliberatiue or [Page 44] [...] voyce? In which, none had Suffrage, but such as A were sworne to the Pope, and the Church of Rome, and pro­fessed Enemies to all that called for Reformation, or a free Councell? And the Pope himselfe, to shew his Charitie, had declared and pronounced the Appellants, Heretikes, before Leo 10. Bull. Iun. 8. 1520. they were condemned by the Councell. I hope, an Assembly of Enemies are no lawfull Councell: And I thinke, the Decrees of such a One, are omni iure nulla, and carrie their nullitie with them through all Law.

And againe, Is that Councell Generall, that hath none of the Easterne Churches consent, nor presence there? Are all the B Greekes so become non Ecclesia, no Church, that they haue no interest in Generall Councels? It numbers indeed among the Subscribers, sixe Greekes; they might be so by Nation, or by Title purposely giuen them: but dare you say they were actu­ally Bishops of, and sent from the Greeke Church to the Coun­cell? Or is it to be accounted a Generall Councell, that in many Sessions had scarce ten Archbishops, or fortie, or fiftie Bishops present? And for the West of Christendome, neerer home, it reckons one English, S. Asaph: but Cardinall Poole was there too. English indeed he was by birth, but not sent to that Coun­cell C by the King and Church of England, but as one of the Popes Legats: for at the beginning of the Councell, he was not Bishop in the Church of England; and after he was Archbishop of Can­terburie, hee neuer went ouer to the Councell. And can you prooue, that S. Asaph went thither by Authoritie? There were but few of other Nations, and it may be, some of them reckoned with no more truth than the Greekes. In all the Sessi­ons vnder Paul the third, but two Frenchmen, and sometimes none; as in the Sixt vnder Iulius the third, when Henry the se­cond, of France, protested against that Councell. And in the D end it is well knowne, how all the French, which were then a good partie, held off, till the Cardinall of Lorraine was got to Rome. As for the Spaniards, they laboured for many things vpon good grounds, and were most vnworthily ouer-borne.

F.

So (said I) would Arrians say of the Councell of Nice. The B. would not admit the case to be like:

B.

So indeed you said. And not you alone: It is the com­mon Obiection made against all that admit not euerie later E Councell, as that Councell of Nice, famous through all the Christian World. In the meane time, nor you nor they consi­der, that the case is not alike, as the B. told you. If the case be alike in all, Why doe not you admit that which was held at [Page 45] Ariminum; and the second, of Ephesus, as well as Nice? If you A say (as yours doe,) It was because the Pope approoued them not; I will put off the inualiditie of this Answere to a sitter time: in the meane space, suppose it true, and strong, this ground is gained, That the case is not alike for consent to all Councels. And if you looke to haue this graunted, That the Pope must confirme, or the Councell's not lawfull; we haue farre more reason to looke that this be not denyed, That the Scripture must not be departed from in Letter or necessarie Sense, or, the Councell's not lawfull. And the consent and confirmation of Scripture is of farre greater Authoritie to make the Councell Authenticall, and B the decisions of it de Fide, than any confirmation of the Popes. The Councell of Nice had the first, you say: We are sure it had the second. The Councell of Trent we are able to prooue had not the second, and so wee haue no reason to respect the first. And to what end doe your learned men maintaine, That a Councell may make a Conclusion de Fide, though it be sim­ply Stapl. passim. sed aliter patres. Quae extra Euangelium sunt non defen­dam? Hilar. lib. 2. ad Const. Extrà, out of all bound of Scripture; but out of a iea­lousie at least, that this of Trent, and some others, haue in their determinations left both Letter and Sense of Scripture? Shew this of Nice, and the B. will graunt so much of the case C to be like.

But what will you say, if Literarū diui­nit' inspiratarū te­stimonijs, L. 2. in Syn. Nic. To. 1. per Nicolinum. Ib. in Osij senten­tia, p. 517. Parati ex S. Spiritus arbitrio per plutima Diui­narū Scripturarum testimonia demon­strare haec ità se habere. Constantine required, That things brought into question, should be answered and solued by Testimonie out of Scripture? And the Bishops of the Nicene Councell neuer refused that Rule. And what will you say, if they professe they depart not from it, but are readie by manie Testimonies of Diuine Scripture to demonstrate their Faith? Is the case then alike betwixt it and Trent? But you say, the B. pretended somewhat else for his not admitting the case to be like. D

F.

Pretending, that the Pope made Bishops of purpose, for his side. But this the Bishop prooued not.

B.

No: nor had he reason to take on him to prooue what he said not. He knowes it will be expected he should prooue what hee saith; and it is hard to prooue the purpose of the Popes heart. For if it be prooued, that hee made Bishops at that time; that some of them were titular onely, and had no liuelyhood to subsist, but out of his Purse (and so must hang at E the strings of it;) that some of these, thus made, were sent to the Councell, and sure not without their Errand: yet if the Pope will say, he neither made nor sent them to ouer-rule the Holy Ghost at that meeting, or of purpose for his side (as no [Page 46] question but it will be said) Who can prooue it, that is not a A Surueyor of the Heart? But though the Popes heart cannot be seene, yet if these and the like presumptions be true, it is a great signe that Trent was too corrupt and factious a meeting for the Holy Ghost to be at. And sure the case in this, not alike at Nice.

That which [...] B. said, was, That Trent could be no indif­ferent Councell to the Church, the Pope hauing made him­selfe a strong partie in it. And this the B. prooued, though you be here not onely content to omit, but plainely to denie the proofe. For did not the B. prooue it thus? and you an­swered B not; That there were more Italian Bishops there, than of all Christendome besides: more? yea, more than double. And this he prooued out of the Councell it selfe, which you had in your hand in Decimo Sexto, but had no great heart to looke it. For where the number of Prelates are expressed that had Suffrage and Vote in that Councell, the Italians are set downe to be 187, and all the rest make but 83. So there were more Italian Bishops by 104, than of all the rest of Christen­dome. Sure the Pope did not meane to be ouer-reached in this Councell: And whatsoeuer became of his infallibilitie other­wise, C he might this way be sure to be infallible in whatsoeuer hee would haue determined. So the B. prooued this suffici­ently. For if it were not to be sure of a side, giue any satisfy­ing reason, Why such a potent partie of Italians, more than double to the whole Christian World, should be there? Shew me the like for Nice, and I will giue it, that the case is alike betweene these two Councels. But you haue not yet done with the B. You adde:

F.

In fine, the B. wished, That a lawfull Generall Coun­cell D were called, to end Controuersies. (The persons present) said, That the King was enclined thereunto, and that therefore wee Catholikes might doe well to concurre.

B.

And what say you to the Bishops wish? You pretend great loue to the Truth, would you not haue it found? Can you, or any Christian, be offended, that there should be a good end of Controuersies? Can you thinke of a better end, than E by a Generall Councell? And if you haue a most gracious King enclined vnto it (as you say it was offered) how can you [...] your selues, if you doe not consent? Yes, it seemes you can: for you say againe,

F.
[Page 47]

I asked the B. Whether he thought a Generall Councell A might [...]? He said, It might.

B.

I presume, you doe not looke the B. or I for him, should enter into a proofe of this Controuersie, Whether a Generall Councell may erre in determination, or not? Your selfe brought no proofe, that it cannot; and till that be brought, the Bishop his speech is good, that it can: And yet he hopes to be found no infringer of any power giuen by Christ to his Church. But it seemes by that which followes, you did by this Questi­on B (Can a Generall Councell erre?) but seeke to win ground for your other, which followes:

F.

If a Generall Councell may erre, What neerer are wee then (said I) to vnitie, after a Councell determined? Yes (said he) although it may erre, yet we should be bound to hold with it, till another come to reuerse it.

B.

Whether a Generall Councell may erre, or not, is a Question C of great consequence in the Church of Christ. To say it cannot erre, leaues the Church not onely without remedie against an Error, but also without sense that it may need a remedie, and so without care to seeke it; which is the miserie of the Church of Rome at this day. To say it can erre, seemes to expose the members of the Church to an vncertaintie and wauering in the Faith, makes vnquiet spirits not onely disrespect former Coun­cels of the Church, but also slight and contemne whatsoeuer it may now determine; into which Error, some opposers of the Church of Rome haue fallen. And vpon this is grounded D your Question, Wherein are wee neerer to vnitie, if a Councell may erre?

In relating the B. his Answer to this, you are not so candide, as you confesse him ingenuous before. For his words did not sound as yours seeme to doe, That wee should hold with the Coun­cell, erre or not erre, till another came to reuerse it: As if grounds of Faith might varie at the Racket, and be cast of each side, as a cunning hand might lay them. You forget againe, omit at least, (and with what mind, you best know) the B. his Caution: For he said, The determination of a Generall Councell erring, was E to stand in force, and haue externall obedience at the least yeel­ded to it, till euidence of Scripture, or a demonstration to the contrary, made the Error appeare, and vntill thereupon another Coun­cell, of equall Authoritie, did reuerse it. Thus then the B.

[Page 48] But indeed he might haue returned vpon you againe: If a A Generall Councell, not confirmed by the Pope, may erre, (which you affirme) To what end then a Generall Councell? And you may answere, Yes: for although a Generall Councell may erre, yet the Pope, as Head of the Church, cannot. An excellent meanes of vnitie, to haue all in the Church as the Pope will haue it, what euer Scripture say, or the Church thinke. And then I pray, to what end a Generall Councell? Will his Ho­linesse be so holy, as to confirme a Generall Councell, if it deter­mine against him?

I, for my part, am willing a little to consider hereupon the B point of Generall Councels, How they may, or may not erre; and a little to looke into the Romane and Protestant opinion concer­ning them; which is more agreeable to the Power and Rule which Christ hath left in his Church, and which is most preserua­tiue of Peace established, or ablest to reduce vnitie into the Church of Christ, when that poore Ship hath her Ribs dashed in [...] by the Waues of Contention. And this Consideration I will venture to the World, but onely in the Nature of a [...], and with submission to my Mother, the Church of En­gland, and the Mother of vs all, the Vniuersall Catholike Church C of Christ.

1. First then I consider, Whether all the Power that an Oe­cumenicall Councell hath to determine, and all the Assistance it hath, not to erre in that determination; it hath it not all from the Catholike vniuersall Bodie of the Church, or Clergie in the Church, if you will, whose Representatiue it is? It seemes it hath. For the gouernment of the Church being not Monar­chicall, but as Christ is Head, this Principle is [...] in nature, Euerie Bodie collectiue, that represents, receiues Power and Priuiled­ges from that Bodie which is represented; else a Representation D might haue force, without the thing it represents; which can­not be: So, no Power in the Councell, no Assistance, but what is in and to the Church. But yet then it may be questioned, Whe­ther the Representing Bodie hath all the power, strength, and pri­uiledge, which the Represented hath? And suppose it hath all the Legall power, yet it hath not all the Naturall, eyther of strength or wisedome, that the whole hath. Now because tho Representatiue hath power from the whole, and the maine [...] can meet no other way; therefore the Acts, [...], or [...] of the Representatiue, be it Ecclesiasticall or Ciuile, are binding in E their strength. But they are not so certaine [...] from [...], as that Wisedome which resides in the [...]. [...] in Assemblies meerely Ciuile, or Ecclesiasticall, all [...] men can­not be in the Bodie that represents. And it is possible so many [Page 49] able and sufficient men (for some particular businesse) may A be out, as that they which are in, may misse, or mis-apply that. Reason and Ground, vpon which the determination is principally to rest. Here, for want of a cleare view of this Ground, the Representatiue Bodie erres; whereas the Represen­ted, by vertue of these Members, may hold the Principle vn­uiolated.

2. Secondly, I consider, That since it is thus in Nature, and in Ciuile Bodies, if it be not so in Ecclesiasticall too, some reason must be giuen why, Ecclesia est v­num corpus mysti­cum per similitudi­nem ad Naturale. Durand. 3. D. 14. q. 2. n. 5. Biel, Lect. 23. in Can. Miss. For that Bodie also consists of men: Those men neyther all equall in their perfections of Knowledge and B Iudgement, whether acquired by Industrie, or rooted in nature, or infused by God: Not all equall, nor any one of them perfect and absolute, or freed from passion and humane infirmities: Nor doth their meeting together, make them infallible in all things, though the Act which is hammered out by many to­gether, must in reason be perfecter than that which is but the Child of one mans sufficiencie. If then a Generall Councell haue no ground of not erring from the men, or the meeting, either it must not be at all, or be by some assistance and power vp­on them, when they are so met together: And this, if it be lesse C than the assistance of the Holy Ghost, it cannot make them secure against Error.

3. Thirdly, I consider, That the assistance of the Holy Ghost is without Error, that's no question; and as little there is, that a Councell hath it. But the doubt that troubles, is, Whether all assistance of the Holy Ghost be affoorded in such a high manner, as to cause all the Definitions of a Councell, in matters fundamen­tall in the Faith, and in remote Deductions from it, to be alike in­fallible?

The Romanists, to prooue there is Omnem veri­tatem infallibiliter docendi, &c. Stapl. Relect. praef. ad Le­ctor. infallible assistance, D produce some places of Scripture; but no one of them in­ferres, much lesse enforces an infallibilitie. The places which Stapleton there rests vpon, are these: S. Ioh. 16.13. I will send you the Spirit of Truth, which will lead you into all Truth: And, S. Ioh. 14.16. This Spirit shall abide with you for euer: And, S. Matth. 28.20. Behold, I am with you vnto the end of the World. To these, others adde, S. Matth. 16.18. The founding of the Church vpon the Rocke, against which the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile: And, Christs prayer for S. Peter, S. Luc. 22.32. That his Faith faile not.

1. For the first, which is, Leading into all Truth, and that for E euer: Prosp. de vocat. Gent. lib. 1. c. 10. All, is not alwayes vniuersally taken in Scripture; nor is it here simply for All Truth: for then a Generall Coun­cell could no more erre in matter of Fact, than in matter of Faith; in which yet your Bellarm. 2. de Conc. c. 8. §. Re­spondeo quidam. selues graunt it may erre. But [Page 50] into All Dubium est an [...] docebit [...], S. Ioh. 14. 26. referendum sit ad [...] dixi [...] quasi non aliud docturum [...]. Sanct. dicat, quam quod ipse antea docuisset, non repugnabo si quis ita velit in­terpretare, &c. [...]. in S. Ioh. 14. Truth, is a limited All; into A All Truth absolutely necessarie to saluati­on: And this, when they suffer them­selues to be led by the blessed Spirit, by the Word of God. And all Truth which Christ had be­fore (at least fundamentally) deliuered vnto them, S. Ioh. 16.14. Hee shall receiue of mine, and shew it vnto you: And againe, S. Ioh. 14.26. Hee shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, which I haue told you. And for this necessarie Truth too, the Apostles receiued this promise not for themselues, and a Councell, but for themselues, and the Bellarm. 2. de Conc. c. 9. §. alte­ram. [...] Sp. Sancti, non est propter Concil. sed vniuersam Ecclesi­am. whole Catholike B Church; of which, a Councell, be it neuer so generall, is a verie little part: Yea, and this verie Assistance is not so ab­solute, nor in that manner to the whole Church, as it was to the Apostles; neyther doth Christ in that place speake directly of a Councell, but of his Apostles Preaching, and Doctrine.

2. As for Christs being with them vnto the end of the World, the Fathers are so various, that in the sense of the antient Church, wee may vnderstand him present in S. August. Tr. 50. in S. Ioh. Isidor. 1. Senten. cap. 14. Maiestie, in S. Hi­lar. in Psalm. 124. Iustine Martyr. Dial. cum Triphone. Prosp. Epist. ad Demetriadem. Power, in Aid S. Hilar. in Psalm. 124. Prosper, lib. 2. de vocat. Gent. cap. 2. [...]. Serm. 2. de Re­surrect. Dom. cap. 3. Isidor. in Ios. cap. 12. and Assistance, a­gainst C the difficulties they should find, for prea­ching Christ; which is the natiue sense, as I take it. And this promise was made, to support their weakenesse. As for his presence, in tea­ching by the Holy Ghost, S. Cyril, lib. 7. Dial. de Trin. Prosp. Epist. ad [...]. few mention it; and no one of them which doth, speakes of any in­fallible Assistance, further than the succeeding Church keepes to the Word of the Apostles, as the Apostles kept to the guidance of the Spirit. Besides, the S. Hilar. in Psalm. 124. S. Cyril, lib. 7. Dial. de Trin. S. Au­gust. 6. de Gen. ad Lit. c. 8. S. Leo. Serm. 10. de Natiu. Dom. c. 5. Isid. in Ios. c. 12. In all which places, Vobiscum is either interpreted cum suis, or fidelibus, or vniuersa Eccle­sia. Fathers referre their speech to D the Church vniuersall, not to anie Councell, or Representatiue Bodie. And Hoc colligitur, sed quae­ritur non quid colligitur, sed quid di­cere voluit. [...]. in S. Matth. 28. Maldonate addes, That this his presence by teaching, is or may be a Collection from the place, but is not the intention of Christ.

3. For the Rocke vpon which the Church is founded, which is the next place, wee dare not lay any other Foundation than 1. Cor. 3. 11. Christ: Christ layd his Ephes. 2.20. Apostles; no question, but vpon himselfe. With these, S. Peter was layd, no man questions: And in prime place of Order, (would his clayming Successors E be content with that) as appeares, and diuerse Fathers wit­nesse, by his particular designement, Tu es Petrus. But yet the Rocke euen there spoken of, is not S. Peters person, eyther onely or properly, but the Faith which hee professed. And [Page 51] to this, beside the Euidence which is in Text and Truth, the A S. [...]. [...] ad [...]. Qui [...] Ecclesiam super Petram aedificatione spirituali. S. Hilar. l. 6. de [...]. Super hanc [...] Confessionis Petram Ecclesiae aedificatio est. Et [...] post, Hec Fides [...] fundamentum est. S. Greg. Nyss. de Trin. aduers. [...]. Super [...] Petram [...] Ecclesiam meam, super [...], videlicet, Christi. S. Isid. Pelus. Epist. lib. 1. Ep. 235. Vt hac ratione [...] omnibus Confessionem traderer, quam ab [...] inspiratus Petrus tanquā basin ac fundamentum iecit, super quod [...] Ecclesiam suam exstruxit. S. Cyril. Alex. de Trin. lib. 4. Petram opinor per agnominationem, [...] quam inconcussam & firmissimam Discipuli Fidem vocauit, in quâ Ecclesia Christi ita fundata, & firmata esset, vt non laberetur, &c. B. Theodor. in Cant. Petram appellat Fidei pietatem, ve­ritatis professionem, &c. Et super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. S. Greg. Ep. [...]. 3. Ep. 33. In vera fide persistite, & vitam vestram in Petram Ecclesiae, hoc est in Confessione [...] Petri Apostolorum Principis solidate. Theophilact. in Matth. 16. Super eum aedificauit Ecclesiam; quia enim confessus [...], &c. quod haec confessio fundamentum erit, &c. S. Aug. in 1. Ep. S. Ioh. tract. 10. Quid est super hanc Petram? Super hanc Fidem, super id quod dictum est, Tu es &c. S. [...]. Orat. 25. Hanc confessionem cum nominasset Christus Petram, Petrum nuncupat eum, qui primum illam est confessus, donans illi hanc appellationem [...] insigne & monumentum huius confessionis. Haec enim est reuerà pietatis Petra, haec salutis basis, &c. S. Ja­cob. Liturgia, [...]; p. 26. &c. And some which [...] the person of S. Peter, professe it is propter robur Confessionis. Iustin Martyr, Dial. cum Triph. S. Chrys. Hom. 2. in Psal. 50. S. Amb. lib. 10. in S. Luc. c. 24. And S. Greg. giues it for a Rule, when Petra is read in the singular number (and so it is here) Christus est, Christ is signified. Fathers come in with very full con­sent. And this, That the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it, is not spoken of the not [...] of the Church princi­pally, but of the not Non deficit. S. Bern. Ser. 79. in Cant. And Bellarmine himselfe going to prooue Ecclesiam non posse deficere, begins with this verie place of Scripture. Lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 13. falling a­way B of it from the Foundation. Now a Church may erre, and daungerously too, and yet not fall from the Foun­dation, especially if that of Lib. 3. de Ecclesia, cap. 14. Bellarmine be true, That there are many things, euen de Fide, of the Faith, which yet are not necessarie C to saluation. Besides, euen here againe the promise of this stable edification, is to the whole Church, not to a Councell; at the least, no further than a Councell builds as a Church is built, that is, vpon Christ.

4. The last place, is Christs Prayer for S. Peters Faith. The [...] sense of which place is, That Christ prayed and obtained for S. Peter perseuerance in the grace of God, against the strong temptation which was to winnow him aboue the rest. But to conclude an infallibilitie from hence in the Pope, or in his Chaire, or in the Romane See, or in a Generall Councell, though the Pope be D President, I find no antient Fathers that dare aduenture it. And Lib. 4. [...] Pon­tif. Rom. cap. 3. Bellarmine himselfe, besides some Popes, in their owne Cause (and that in Epistles counterfeit, or falsely alledged) hath not a Father to name for this sense of the place, till he come downeto Chrysologus, Theophylact, and S. Bernard: of which, Chrysologus his speech is but a flash of Rhetorike; and the other two are men of Yesterday, compared with Antiquitie, and liued when (it was Gods great grace, and our wonder) the corruption of the time had not made them corrupter than they are. And Thomas is re­solute, that what is meant here beyond S. Peters person, is 2 2. q. 2. A 6. ad 3. re­ferred E to the whole Church. And the Glasse vpon the Canon Law is more peremptorie than he, euen to the denyall, that it is Causa. 24. q. 1. C. A Recta. meant of the Pope. And if this place warrant not the Popes Faith, Where is the infallibilitie of the Councell that depends vpon it?

[Page 52] And for all the places together, weigh them with indifferen­cie, A and either they speake of the Church (including the Apo­stles) as all of them doe; and then all graunt the voyce of the Church is Gods voyce, Diuine and Infallible: or else they are generall, vnlimitted, and applyable to priuate Assemblies, as well as Generall Councels; which none graunt to be infallible, but some mad Enthusiasts: or else they are limitted, not simply into All Truth, but, All necessarie to Saluation; in which I shall easily graunt a Generall Councell cannot erre, if it suffer it selfe to be led by this [...] of Truth in the Scripture, and take not vpon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit. For sup­pose B these places, or any other, did promise Assistance euen to Infallibilitie, yet they graunted it not to euerie Generall Coun­cell, but to the Catholike Bodie of the Church it selfe. And if it be in the whole Church principally, then is it in a Gene­rall Councell but by Consequent, as the Councell represents the whole. And that which belongs to a thing by consequent, doth not otherwise, nor longer, belong vnto it, than it consents and cleaues to that vpon which it is a Consequent. And there­fore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance, but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ, whose it is C to heare his Word, and determine by it. And therefore, if a Generall Councell will goe out of the Churches Way, it may easily goe without the Churches Truth.

4. Fourthly I consider, That All agree, That the Church in generall can neuer erre from the Faith necessarie to saluati­on: No Persecution, no Temptation, and no [...]. 16.18. Gates of Hell, whatsoeuer is meant by them, can euer so preuaile against it. For all the members of the Militant Church cannot erre, either in the whole Faith, or in any Article of it; it is impossible. For if all might so erre, there could be no vnion betweene them as D members, and Christ the Head: And no vnion betweene Head and members, no Bodie, and so no Church; which cannot be. But there is not the like consent, That Ecclesia [...] fidem ha­bet [...], &c. non quidem in Generali Synodo congregata, quam aliquoties errasse [...], &c. Wald. lib. 2. Doct. Fid. Ar. 2. c. 19. §. 1. Generall Councels can­not erre. And it seemes strange to me, that the Fathers ha­uing to doe with so many Heretikes, and so many of them op­posing Church. Authoritie in their condemnation, this Pro­position, euen in tearmes (A Generall Councell cannot erre) should be found in none of them, that I can yet see. Suppose it were true, That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day, which will not be found true; E yet this would not haue followed, that it is therefore infalli­ble, and cannot erre. I haue not time to descend into particu­lars; therefore to the Generall still. S. Augustine 2. Bapt. contr. Donat. cap. 3. puts a dif­ference betweene the Rules of Scripture, and the definitions [Page 53] of men. This difference is, Praeponitur Scriptura, That the Scrip­ture A hath the Prerogatiue: That Prerogatiue is, That whatsoeuer is found written in Scripture, may neither be doubted, nor disputed, whether it be true, or right: But the Letters of Bishops may not onely be disputed, but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise than they, or by Nationall Councels; and Nationall Councels, by [...], or Generall: And euen Ipsa (que) plenaria [...] priora à poste­riorib' emendari. Plenarie Councels themselues may be amended, the former by the latter. It seemes it was no newes with S. Augustine, that a Generall Councell might erre, and therefore inferior to the Scripture, which may neither be doubted, nor disputed, where it affirmes. And if it be so with B the definition of a Councell too (as Vox Ecclesiae talis [...], vt non de eâ iudicemus [...] ne an secus docue­rit. So Stapl. Rel. Cont. 4. q. 1. Ar. 1. Stapleton would haue it) That that may neither be doubted, nor disputed, Where is then the Scriptures Prerogatiue?

I know there is much shifting about this place, but it cannot be wrastled off. Stapleton De Regulis Mo­rum & Disciplina. [...]. Con. 6. q. 3. A. 4. sayes first, That S. Augustine speakes of the Rules of Manners, and Discipline: And this is Bellarmines last shift. Both are out, and Bellarmine in a Contradiction. Bel­larmine in a Contradiction: For first hee tells vs, Generall Councels cannot erre in Lib. 2. de Con­cil. [...]. 2. Princip. Precepts of Manners; and then, to turne off S. Augustine in this place, he tells vs, That if S. Au­gustine C doth not speake of matter of Fact, but of Right, and of vniuersall Questions of Right, then he is to be vnderstood of Ib. cap. 7. §. Po­test etiam. Precepts of Manners, not of Points of Faith. Where he hath first runne himselfe vpon a Contradiction; and then wee haue gayned this ground vpon him, That either his Answere is no­thing, or else against his owne state of the Question. A Gene­rall Councell can erre in Precepts of Manners; and both are out: For the whole dispute of S. Augustine, is against the Error of Cyprian, followed by the [...], That true Baptisme could not be giuen by Heretikes, and such as were out of the D Church. And the proofe which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the subsequent words, ( Quando aliquo rerum experimen­to quod clausam e­rat aperitur. When by any experiment of things, that which was shut, is opened) is too weake: For experi­ment there is not of Fact; nor are the words conclusum est, as if it were of a Rule of Discipline concluded, as Stapleton cites them; but a further experiment or proofe of the Question in hand, and pertaining to Faith, which was then shut vp, and as S. Augustine after speakes, Ib. c. 4. Nebulis inuoluta. wrapped vp in cloudie darkenesse.

Next, Stapleton Sensus est quod Concilia posteriora emēdant, id est, per­fectius explicant fi­dem in semine an­tiquae Doctrinae la­tentem, &c. will haue it, That if S. Augustine doe speake of a Cause of Faith, then his meaning is, that latter Generall E Councels can mend, that is, explicate more perfectly that Faith which lay hid in the Seed of antient Doctrine. He makes in­stance, That about the Diuinitie of Christ, the Councell of Ephesus explicated the first of Nice; Chalcedon, both of them; [Page 54] Constance, Chalcedon: And then concludes, Quâ in re ni­hil erroneum vllum Concil. docuit, &c. In all which A things, none of (these) Councels taught that which was erroneous. An excellent Conclusion: These Councels, and These, in this thing, taught no Error, and were onely explained: Therefore no Councell can erre in any matter of Faith; or therefore S. Augustine speakes not of an emendation of Error, but of an explanation of Sense: whereas euerie Eye sees neither of these can follow.

Now that S. Augustine meant plainely, That euen a Plenarie Councell might erre, and that Saepè. often, (for that is his word) and that in matter of Faith, and might and ought so to be a­mended B in a latter Councell, I thinke will thus appeare. First, his word is Emendari, amend, which properly supposes for Er­ror and faultinesse, not explanation: And S. Augustine needed not goe to a word of such a Not vsed, but either for conigere, or auferre. And so S. Augustine vses the word, l. 20. cont. Faust. c. 21. and Bel­larmine, though he interprete it in mat­ter of fact, yet equals the word with cor­rexit. 2. de Conc. ca. 8. §. Respond. Quaest. forced sense, nor sure would, especially in a Disputation against Aduersaries. Next, S. Augu­stines Dispute is against S. Cyprian, and the Councell held at Carthage, about Baptisme by Heretikes; in which point, that Nationall Councell erred (as all now agree.) And S. Augustines deduction goes on: Scripture cannot be other than right; that is the prerogatiue of it: but Bishops may, and be Reprehendi. Re­prehended C for it, if peraduenture they erre from the Truth; and that either by more learned Bishops, or by Prouinciall Coun­cels. Here Reprehension, and that for deuiation from the Truth, is (I hope) Emendation properly, and not Explanation onely. e Si quid in ijs fortè a veritate de­uiatum est. Then Prouinciall Councels, they must Cedere. yeeld to Generall; and to yeeld, is not in case of Explanation onely. Then it fol­lowes, that euen Plenarie Councels themselues may be amended, the former by the latter; still retayning that which went be­fore, If peraduenture they erred, or made deuiation from the Truth. And if this be not so, I would faine know, why in one and the D same tenure of words, in one and the same continuing Argu­ment, and deduction of S. Augustine, Reprehendi should be in pro­per sense, and à veritate deuiatum in proper sense, and Cedere in proper sense; and onely Emendari should not be proper, but stand for an Explanation? If you say the reason is, because the former words are applyed to men, and Nationall Councels, both which may erre, but this last to Generall Councels, which cannot erre; this is most miserable begging of the Principle, and thing in question.

Againe, S. Augustine concludes there, That the Generall E Councell preceding, may be amended by Generall Councels that follow, Quum cognos­citur quod latebat. When that is knowne, which lay hid before. Not as Stapleton would haue it, lay hid as in the Seed of antient Do­ctrine onely, and so needed nothing but explanation; but hid [Page 55] in some darkenesse, or ambiguitie, which led the former into A error, and mistaking, as appeares: For S. Augustine would haue this amendment made, without sacrilegious Pride, (doubtlesse of in­sulting vpon the former Councell, that was to be amended) and without swelling Arrogancie (sure against the weakenesse in the former Councell) and without contention of Enuie (which vses to accompanie mans frailetie, where his or his friends er­ror is to be amended by the latter Councell) and in holy Humi­litie, in Catholike Peace, in Christian Charitie, (no question, that a Schisme be not made to teare the Church, as here the Donatists did, while one Councell goes to reforme the Lapse of another, B if any be.) Now to what end should this learned Father be so zealous in this worke, this highest worke that I know in the Church (Reuiewing and surueying Generall Councels) to keepe off Pride, and Arrogancie, and Enuie, and to keepe all in Humi­litie, Peace, and Charitie; if after all this noyse, he thought lat­ter Councels might doe nothing but amend, that is, explaine the former?

That shift which Bellarmine addes to these two of Stapleton, is poorest of all, namely, That S. Augustine speakes of vnlawfull Councels; and it is no question but they may be amended, as C the second Ephesine was at Calcedon: for this Answere giues vp the case. For it graunts, That a Councell may erre, and be a­mended in Doctrine of Faith; and in case it be not amended, condemned and reiected by the Church, as this of Ephesus and diuerse others were. And as for that meere Tricke, of the Popes Instruction, Approbation, or Confirmation, to preserue it from Error, or ratifie it, that it hath not erred; the most antient Church knew it not. Hee had his Suffrage, as other great Pa­triarkes had; and his Vote was highly esteemed, not onely for his place, but for worth too, as Popes were then: But that the D whole Councell depended vpon him, and his confirmation, was then vnknowne, and I verily thinke, at this day not belee­ued by your selues.

5. Fiftly, it must be considered, If a Generall Councell may erre, Who shall iudge it? S. Augustine is at Ibid. priora à poste­rioribus, Nothing sure, that is lesse than a Generall Councell. Why, but this yet layes all open to vncertainties, and makes way for a Whirlewind of a priuate spirit, to ruffle the Church. No, neither of these. First, all is not open to Vncertainties: For Generall Councels, lawfully called and ordered, and law­fully E proceeding, are a great and an awfull Representation, and cannot erre in matters of Faith, if they keepe themselues to Gods Rule, and attempt not to make a new of their owne; and are with all submission to be obserued by euerie Christian, where Scrip­ture [Page 56] or euident Demonstration come not against it. Nor doth it A make way for the Whirlewind of a priuate spirit: For priuate spi­rits are too giddie to rest vpon Scripture, and too headie and shallow to be acquainted with demonstratiue Arguments. And it were happie for the Church, if shee might neuer be troubled with priuate spirits, till they brought such Arguments. I know this is hotely obiected against Praefat. p. 29. Hooker: The Dialogus dict' Deus & Rex. Author calls him a Cordatus Pro­testans. wise Protestant, yet turnes thus vpon him: If a Councell must yeeld to a demonstratiue proofe, Who shall iudge whether the Argument that is brought, be a Demonstration, or not? For euerie man that will kicke against the Church, will say the Scripture he vrges B is euident, and his Reason a Demonstration. And what is this, but to leaue all to the wildnesse of a priuate spirit?

Can any ingenuous man reade this passage in Hooker, and dreame of a priuate spirit? For to the Question, Who shall iudge? Hooker answers, as if it had beene then made, Praef. p. 29. An Argument necessarie and demonstratiue, is such (saith hee) as being proposed to any man, and vnderstood, the mind cannot chuse but in­wardly assent vnto it. So, it is not enough to thinke or say it is demonstratiue. The light then of a Demonstratiue Argument, is the euidence which it selfe hath in it selfe to all that vnderstand C it. Well, but because all vnderstand it not, If a Quarrell be made, who shall decide it? No question, but a Generall Coun­cell, not a priuate spirit: first, in the intent of the Author; for Hooker in all that discourse makes the Sentence of the Councell Praef. p. 28. binding: and therefore that is made Iudge, not a priuat spirit. And then for the Iudge of the Argument, it is as plaine: For if it be euident to any man, then to so many learned men as are in a Councell doubtlesse: And if they cannot but assent, it is hard to thinke them so impious, that they will define a­gainst it. And if that which is euident to any man, is not eui­dent D to such a graue Assembly, it is no Demonstration, and the producers of it ought to rest, and not to trouble the Church.

Nor is this Hookers alone, nor is it newly thought on by vs: It is a ground in Nature, which Grace doth euer set right, neuer vndermine. And S. Augustine 2. De Bapt. cont. Don. cap. 4. hath it twice in one Chapter, That S. Cyprian and that Councell at Carthage would haue presently yeelded to any one that would Vni verū dicen­ti, & demonstranti. demonstrate Truth. Nay, it is a Rule with Cont. Fund. c. 4. him, Consent of Nations, Authoritie con­firmed by Miracles and Antiquitie, S. Peters Chaire, and Succession from it, Motiues to keepe him in the Catholike Church, must not hold E him against Demonstration of Truth; Quae quidem si tam manifesta mō ­stratur, vt in dubiū venire non potest, praeponēda est om­nib' illis reb' quib' in Catholica tene­or: Ita si aliquid a­pertissimū in Euan­gelio. Ib. c. 5. which if it be so clearely monstrated, that it cannot come into doubt, it is to be preferred before all those things, by which a man is held in the Catholike Church. There­fore an euident Scripture, or Demonstration of Truth, must [Page 57] take place euerie where; but where these cannot be had, there A must be submission to Authoritie.

And doth not Bellarmine himselfe graunt this? For speaking of Councels, he deliuers this Proposition, That Inferiors may not iudge whether their Superiors (and that in a Councell) doe proceed lawfully, or not. But then hauing bethought himselfe, that Infe­riors at all times, and in all causes, are not so to be cast off, hee addes this Exception, Lib. 2. de Con­cil. c. 8. nisi manife­stissimè conster in­tcllerabilem Erro­rem committi. Vnlesse it manifestly appeare, that an intol­lerable Error be committed. So then, if such an Error be, and be manifest, Inferiors may doe their dutie, and a Councell must yeeld; vnlesse you will accuse Bellarmine too of leaning to a B priuate spirit; for neither doth hee expresse who shall iudge whether the Error be intollerable.

This will not downe with you, but the Definition of a Ge­nerall Councell is and must be infallible. Your fellowes tell vs (and you can affirme no more) That the voyce of the Church determining in Councell, is not Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 3. Ar. 1. Humane, but Diuine: That is well; Diuine, then sure infallible. Yea, but the Proposition stickes in the throat of them that would vtter it. It is not Di­uine simply, but in a Diuina suo mo­do. Ibid. manner Diuine. Why but then sure not infallible, because it may speake loudest in that manner in which C it is not Diuine. Nay more: The Church (forsooth) is an infalli­ble Foundation of Faith, In altiori ge­nere, viz. in genere causae efficientis, atque adeò aliqua ex parte formalis. Ib. q. 4. Ar. 3. in a higher kind than the Scripture: For the Scripture is but a Foundation in testimonie, and matter to be be­leeued; but the Church as the efficient cause of Faith, and in some sort the verie formall. Is not this Blasphemie? Doth not this knocke against all euidence of Truth, and his owne grounds, that sayes it? Against all euidence of Truth: For in all ages, all men that once admitted the Scripture to be the Word of God (as all Christians doe) doe with the same breath graunt it most vndoubted and infallible. But all men haue not so iudged D of the Churches Definitions, though they haue in greatest o­bedience submitted to them. And against his owne grounds, that sayes it: For the Scripture is absolutely and euerie way Di­uine; the Churches Definition is but suo modo, in a sort or man­ner Diuine. But that which is but in a sort, can neuer be a Foun­dation in a higher degree, than that which is absolute, and eue­rie way such: Therefore neyther can the Definition of the Church be so infallible as the Scripture; much lesse in altiori genere, in a higher kind than the Scripture.

But because, when all other things faile, you flye to this, That E the Churches Definition in a Generall Councell, is by Inspira­tion, and so Diuine and infallible; my hast shall not carrie me from a little Consideration of that too.

6. Sixtly then, If the Definition of a Generall Councell [Page 58] be infallible, then the infallibilitie of it is either in the Conclusi­on, A and in the Meanes that prooue it; or in the Conclusion, not the Meanes; or in the Meanes, not the Conclusion. But it is infallible in none of these. Not in the first, The Conclusion, and the Meanes: For there are diuers deliberations in Generall Councels, where the Conclusion is Catholike, but the Meanes by which they prooue it, not firme; therefore not infallible. Not in the se­cond, The Conclusion, and not the Meanes: For the Conclusion must follow the nature of the premisses, or Principles out of which it is deduced; therefore if they be sometimes vncer­taine, as is prooued before, the Conclusion cannot be infalli­ble. B Not in the third, The Meanes, and not the Conclusion: For that cannot but be true and necessarie, if the Meanes be so. And this I am sure you will neuer graunt; because if you should, you must denie the infallibilitie which you seeke to establish.

To this (for I confesse the Argument is old, but can neuer be worne out, nor shifted off) your great Maister Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. Stapleton (who is miserably hampered in it, and indeed so are yee all) answers, That the infallibilitie of a Councell is in the second course; that is, It is infallible in the Conclusion, though it be vncertaine and C fallible in the Meanes and proofe of it. How comes this to passe? It is a thing altogether vnknowne in Nature, and Art too, That fallible Principles can either father or mother, beget or bring forth an infallible Conclusion. Well, that is graunted in Na­ture, and in all Argumentation, that causes knowledge. But wee shall haue Reasons for it: Ib. Not. 4. First, because the Church is dis­cursiue, and vses the weights and moments of Reason in the Meanes; but is Propheticall, and depends vpon immediate Reuelation from the Spirit of God, in deliuering the Conclusion. It is but the making of this appeare, and all Controuersie is at an end. Well, I will not D discourse here, to what end there is any vse of Meanes, if the Conclusion be Propheticall, which yet is iustly vrged; for no good cause can be assigned of it. If it be Propheticall in the Conclusion (I speake still of the present Church; for that which included the Apostles, which had the Spirit of Prophe­sie, and immediate Reuelation, was euer propheticke in the De­finition) Then since it deliuers the Conclusion not according to Nature and Art, that is, out of Principles which can beare it, there must be some supernaturall Authoritie which must deliuer this Truth: That (say I) must be the Scripture: For if you flye E to immediate Reuelation now, the Enthusiasme must be yours. But the Scriptures which are brought, in the verie Exposition of all the Primitiue Church, neyther say it, nor inforce it: Therefore Scripture warrants not your Prophesie in the Con­clusion. [Page 59] I know no other thing can warrant it. If you thinke A the Tradition of the Church can, make the World beholding to you. Produce any Father of the Church, that sayes, this is an vniuersall Tradition of the Church, That her Definitions in a Ge­nerall Councell are Propheticall, and by immediate Reuelation. Pro­duce any one Father, that sayes it of his owne authoritie, That he thinkes so: Nay, make it appeare, that euer any Prophet, in that which he deliuered from God as infallible Truth, was euer discursiue at all in the Meanes: Nay, make it but probable in the ordinarie course of Prophesie (and I hope you goe no higher, nor will I offer, at Gods absolute Power) That that B which is discursiue in the Meanes, can be Propheticke in the Conclusion, and you shall be my great Apollo for euer. In the meane time, I haue learned this from Propherae au­diebant à Deo in­teriùs inspirante. Thom. 2. 2. q. 5. A. 1. ad 3. yours, That all Prophe­sie is by Vision, Inspiration, &c. and that no Vision admits dis­course: That all Prophesie is an Illumination, not alwayes present, but when the Word of the Venit ad me Verbum Domini. Lord came to them, and that was not by discourse. And yet you Stapl. Rel. Cont. 4. q. 2. p. 473. say againe, That this Propheticke infallibilitie of the Church is not gotten without studie and Industrie. You should doe well to tell vs too, why God would put his Church to studie for the Spirit of Prophesie, C which neuer anie particular Prophet was put vnto. Propheticam reuelationem nullo pacto haberi [...], vel ope naturae, vel studio, Contra Aui­cennam, Algazalē, Aueroem, &c. Fran. Picus, 2. Prenot. c. 4. And whosoeuer shall studie for it, shall doe itin vaine, since Pro­phesie is 1. Cor. 12.10. a Gift, and can neuer be an acquired Habite. And there is somewhat in it, that Bellarmine, in all his Dispute for the Authoritie of Generall Councels, dares not come at this Rocke. L. 2. de Conc. c. 12. He preferres the Conclusion, and the Ca­non, before the Acts and the deliberations of Councels, and so doe wee: but I doe not remember, that euer he speakes out, That the Conclusion is deliuered by Prophesie, or Reuelation. Sure he sounded the Shore, and found danger here. He did D sound it: For a little before he speakes plainely (Would his bad cause let him be constant?) Concilia non habent, neque scri­bunt immediatas reuelationes &c. sed deducunt, &c. Councels doe deduce their Conclusions. What? from Inspiration? No: But out of the Word of God, and that per ratiocinationem, by Argumenta­tion: Neyther haue they, nor doe they write any immediate Reuelations.

The second Reason why hee will haue it propheticke in the Conclusion, is, Stapl. ib. p 474. Because that which is determined by the Church, is matter of Faith, not of Knowledge: And that therefore the Church proposing it to be beleeued, though it vse Meanes, yet it stands E not vpon Art, or Meanes, or Argument, but the Reuelation of the Holy Ghost: Else when we embrace the Conclusion proposed, it should not be an Assent of Faith, but a Habit of Knowledge. This for the first part (That the Church vses the Meanes, but followes them [Page 60] not) is all one in substance with the former Reason. And for A the latter part, That then our admitting the Decree ofa Coun­cell, would be no Assent of Faith, but a Habit of Knowledge; What great inconuenience is there, if it be graunted? For I thinke it is vndoubted Truth, That one and the same Conclu­sion may be Faith to the Beleeuer, that cannot prooue, and Knowledge to the Learned, that can. And S. Augustine Cont. Fund. c. 4., I am sure in regard of one and the same thing, euen this the verie Wisedome of the Church, in her Doctrine, ascribes Vnderstan­ding to one sort of men, and Beleefe to another weaker sort. And Th. p. 1. q. 2. a. 2. ad 1. Nihil prohibet illud quod secundū se demonstrabile est & scibile, [...] aliquo accipi vt Credibile qui [...] non capit. Thomas goes with him. B

And for further satisfaction, if not of you, of others, this may be considered too: Man lost by sinne the Integritie of his Nature, and cannot haue Light enough to see the way to Hea­uen, but by Grace. This Grace was first merited, after giuen by Christ. This Grace is first kindled in Faith; by which, if wee agree not to some supernaturall Principles, which no Reason can demonstrate simply, wee can neuer see our way. But this Light, when it hath made Reason submit it selfe, cleares the Eye of Reason, it neuer puts it out. In which sense it may be is that of Lib. 3. [...] & vbique dif­fusa. Optatus, That the verie Catholike Church it selfe is rea­sonable, C as well as diffused euerie where. By which Reason enlight­ned (which is stronger than Reason) the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to conuert, or conuince, or Omnia genera ingeniorum subdita Scripturae. S. Aug. lib. 22. cont. Faust. [...]. 96. stop the mouthes at least of Philosophers, and the great men of Rea­son, in the verie point of Faith, where it is at highest. To the present occasion then. The first, immediate, Fundamentall Points of Faith, without which there is no saluation; they, as they cannot be prooued by Reason, so neither need they be deter­mined by any Councell, nor euer were they attempted, they are so plaine set downe in the Scripture. If about the sense and D true meaning of these, or necessarie deduction out of these prime Articles of Faith, Generall Councels determine any thing, as they haue done in Nice, and the rest; there is no inconue­uience, that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be beleeued, as it reflects vpon the Articles and Grounds indemon­strable; Almain. 3. D. 24. q. 1. and yet knowne to the Learned, by the Meanes and Proofe by which that deduction is vouched and made good. And againe, the Conclusion of a Councell; suppose that in Nice, about the Consubstantialitie of Christ with the Father, in it selfe considered, is or may be indemonstrable by Reason; E There I beleeue and assent in Faith; but the same Conclusi­on Concilium Ni­caenū [...] Con­clusionem ex Scrip­turis. Bellar. 2. [...] Conc. c. 12., if you giue me the ground of Scripture, and the Creed, (and somewhat must be supposed in all, whether Faith, or Knowledge) is demonstrable by naturall Reason against any [Page 61] Arrian in the World. And if it be demonstrable, I may A know it, and haue a habit of it. And what inconuenience in this? For the weaker sort of Christians, which cannot deduce when they haue the Principle graunted, they are to rest vpon the Definition onely, and their assent is meere Faith: yea, and the Learned too, where there is not a Demonstration euident to them, assent by Faith onely, and not by Knowledge. And what inconuenience in this? Nay, the necessitie of Nature is such, that these Principles once giuen, the vnderstanding of man cannot rest, but it must be thus. And the 1. S. Pet. 3.15. Apostle would neuer haue required a man to be able to giue a reason and B an account of the Hope that is in him, if he might not be able to know his account; or haue lawfull interest to giue it, when he knew it, without preiudicing his Faith by his Knowledge. And suppose exact Knowledge and meere Beleefe cannot stand together in the same person, in regard of the same thing, by the same meanes, yet that doth not make void this Truth. For where is that exact Knowledge, or in whom, that must not meerely, in points of Faith, beleeue the Article or Ground vp­on which they rest? But when that is once beleeued, it can demonstrate many things from it. And Definitions of Coun­cels C are not Principia Fidei, Principles of Faith, but Deductions from them.

7. And now because you aske, Wherein wee are neerer to Vnitie by a Councell, if a Councell may erre? Besides the Answer giuen, I promised to consider which Opinion was most agree­able with the Church, which most able to preserue or reduce Christian Peace; the Romane, That a Councell cannot erre; orthe Protestants, That it can. And this I propose, not as a Rule, but leaue the Christian World to consider of it, as I doe.

1. First then I consider, Whether in those places of Scripture D before mentioned, or other, there be promised and performed to the present Church an absolute infallibilitie? or whether such an infallibilitie will notserue the turne, as Rel. Cont. 4. q. 2. p. 468. Stapleton, after much wriggling, is forced to acknowledge? One not euerieway exact: because it is enough, if the Church doe diligently insist vpon that which was once receiued: and there is not need of so great certaintie, to open and explicate that which lyes hid in the Seed of Faith sowne, and deduce from it, as to seeke out and teach that which was altogether vnknowne. And if this be so, then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of infal­libilitie, E than the present Church; which if it follow the Scrip­ture, is infallible enough, though it hath not the same degree of certaintie which the Apostles had, and the Scripture hath. Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine, that in a whole Chapter [Page 62] disputes [...] Prerogatiues, in certaintie of Truth L. 2. [...] Conc. c. 12., that the A Scripture hath aboue a Councell; and at last concludes, That they may be said to be equally certaine in infallible Truth.

2. The next thing I consider, is: Suppose this not Exact, but congruous infallibilitie in the Church; Is it not residing according to power and right of Authoritie in the whole Church, and in a Generall Councell, onely by power Sub autoritate Generalis Cōcilij. [...]. Doct. Fid. lib. 2. A. 2. c. 20. depu­ted, with Mandate to determine? The places of Scripture, with Expositions of the Fathers vpon them, make me apt to beleeue this. S. Peter (saith S. Augustine Petrus perso­nam [...] Ca­tholicae sustinet, & huic datae sunt claues quum Petro datae. De Agon. Chr. c. 30.) did not receiue the Keyes of the Church, but in the person of the Church. Now sup­pose B the Key of Doctrine be to let in Truth, and shut out Er­ror; and suppose the Key rightly vsed, infallible in this: yet this infallibilitie is primely in the Church; in whose person, not strictly in his owne, S. Peter receiued the Keyes.

Here Stapleton layes crosse my way againe. He would thrust me out of this Consideration. [...]. Cont. 6. q. 3 A. 5. Sed prop­ter Primatum quē gerebat Ecclesiae: ideoque etsi fina­liter Ecclesia acce­pit, tamen forma­liter Petrus acce­pit. He graunts, that S. Peter recei­ued these Keyes indeed, and in the person of the Church; but that was because he was Primate of the Church: [...] therefore the Church receiued the Keyes finally, but S. Peter for­mally: that is (if I mistake him not) S. Peter for himselfe and C his Successors, receiued the Keyes in his owne Right; but to this end, to benefit the Church, of which he was made Pastor. But I am in a Consideration, and I would haue this considered, where it is euer read, That to receiue a thing in the person of another, is onely meant finally to receiue it, that is, to his good, and not in his right. I should thinke, he that receiues any thing in the person of another, receiues it indeed to his good, and to his vse, but in his right too: And that the primarie and for­mall right is not in the receiuer, but in him whose person hee sustaines, while he receiues it. This stumbling-blocke then is D nothing; and in my Consideration it stands still, That the Church in generall receiued the Keyes, and all Power signified by them, and by the assistance of Gods Spirit may be able to vse them, and perhaps to open and shut in some things infalli­bly, when the Pope and a Generall Councell too (forgetting both her and her Rule, the Scripture) are to seeke how to turne these Keyes in their Wards.

3. The third thing I consider, is: Suppose in the whole Catholike Church Militant, an absolute infallibilitie in the prime Foundations of Faith, absolutely necessarie to saluation; E and that this power of not erring so, is not communicable to a Generall Councell, which represents it, but that the Councell is subiect to error: This supposition doth not onely preserue that which you desire in the Church, an Infallibilitie; but it [Page 63] meets with all inconueniences, which vsually haue done, and A doe perplexe the Church. And here is still a remedie for all things: For if priuate respects, if Many of these were potent at Ari­minum, and Se­leucia. Bandies in a Faction, if power and fauour of some parties, if weakenesse of them which haue the ma­naging, if any mixture of State-Councels, if any departure from the Rule of the Word of God, if any thing else sway and wrinch the Councell; Determina­tionibus quae à Concilio, vel Pon­tifice summo fiūt, super ijs [...] quae sub­stantiā fidei con­cernunt, necessa­rio credendum est, quod dum vniuer­salis Ecclesia non reclamet. Fr. Pic. Mirand. Theor. 8. the whole Church, vpon euidence found in ex­presse Scripture, or demonstration of this miscarriage, hath power to represent her selfe in another Bodie, or Councell, and to take order for what was amisse, eyther practised or conclu­ded. So here is a meanes, without infringing any lawfull Au­thoritie B of the Church, to preserue or reduce Vnitie, and yet graunt, as the B. did, and as the Artic. 21. Church of England doth, That a Generall Councell may erre. And this course the Church tooke, did call and represent her selfe in a new Councell, and define against the Hereticall Conclusions of the former: as in the case at Ariminum, and the second of Ephesus, is eui­dent.

4. The next thing I consider, is: Suppose a Generall Coun­cell infallible in all things which are of Faith: If it prooue not so, but that an Error in the Faith be concluded; the same C erring Opinion that makes it thinke it selfe infallible, makes the Error of it seeme irreuocable. And when Truth (which lay hid) shall be brought to light, the Church (who was lulled asleepe by the Opinion of Infallibilitie, is left open to all man­ner of Distractions, as it appeares at this day. And that a Councell may erre (besides all other instances, which are not few) appeares by that Error of the Councell of Sess. 13. Constance. And one instance is enough to ouerthrow a Generall, be it a Councell. S. Matth. 26. 1. Cor. 11. 23. Christ instituted the Sacrament of his Bodie and Bloud in both kinds. To breake Christs Institution, is a damnable D Error, and so confessed by Returne of vn­truths vpon M. Iew­el, Ar. 2. Stapleton. The Councell is bold, and defines peremptorily, That to communicate in both kinds, is not necessarie, with a Non obstante to the Institution of Christ. Consider with me, Is this an Error, or not? 4. de Eucha­rist. c. 26. Bellarmine, and Stapleton, and you too, say it is not; because to receiue vn­der both kinds, is not by Diuine Right. No? no sure. For it was not Christs Bell. [...]. Precept, but his Example. Why, but I had thought, Christs Institution of a Sacrament had beene more than his Example onely, and as binding for the Necessa­ries of a Sacrament, the Matter and Forme, as a Precept: There­fore E speake out, and denie it to be Christs Institution, or else graunt with Stapleton, It is a damnable Error to goe against it. If you can prooue, that Christs Institution is not as binding to vs as a Precept (which you shall neuer be able) take the Pre­cept [Page 64] with it, S. Matth. 26. 1. Cor. 11. [...], in Liturg. S. Chrysoft. Drinke yee All of this: which though you shift A as you can, yet you can neuer make it other than it is, A Bin­ding Precept. But Bellarmine hath yet one better Deuice than this, to saue the Councell. Hee saith it is a meere Calumnie, and that the Councell hath no such thing; That the Non ob­stante hath no reference to Receiuing vnder both kinds, but to the time of Receiuing it, after Supper; in which the Councell saith, the Custome of the Church is to be obserued Non obstante, notwith­standing Christs Example. How foule Bellarmine is in this, must appeare by the words of the Councell, which are these: Licet Christus post Coenam instituerit, & suis Discipulis administrauerit sub vtraque specie Panis & Vini hoc venerabile Sacramentum, tamen hoc Non obstante, non debet confici post Coenam, nec recipi nisi à ieiunis. (Here Bellarmine [...], and goes no further, but the Councell goes on.) Et similiter quòd licet in Primitiua Ecclesia Sacramenta reciperentur sub vtra que specie à Fidelibus, tamen haec Consuetu­do, vt à Laicis sub specie Panis tantum suscipiatur, habenda est pro Lege, quam non licet reprobare: Et asserere hanc illicitam esse, est Erroneum. Et perti­naciter asserentes sunt [...] tanquam Haeretici. Sess. 13. Though Christ instituted this venerable B Sacrament, and gaue it his Disciples after Supper, vnder both kinds of Bread and Wine, yet Non obstante, notwithstanding this, it ought not to be consecrated after Supper; nor receiued, but fasting. And likewise, that though in the Primitiue Church this Sacrament was receiued by the faithfull vnder both kinds; yet this Custome, that it should be receiued by Lay­men onely vnder the kind of Bread, is to be held for a Law, which may C not be refused. And to say this is an vnlawfull Custome of Receiuing vnder one kind, is erroneous; and they which persist in saying so, are to be punished and driuen out as Heretikes.

Now, where is here any slander of the Councell? The words are plaine, and the Non obstante must necessarily (for ought I can yet see) be referred to both Clauses in the words following, because both Clauses went before it, and hath as much force against Receiuing vnder both kinds, as against Re­ceiuing after Supper. Yea, and the after-words of the Coun­cell couple both together, in this reference: for it followes, D Et similiter, And so likewise, that though in the Primitiue Church, &c. And a man, by the Definition of this Councell, may be an Heretike, for standing to Christs Institution, in the very mat­ter of the Sacrament: And the Churches Law for One kind may not be refused, but Christs Institution vnder Both kinds may. And yet this Councell did not erre: No; take heed of it.

But your Opinion is yet more vnreasonable than this: For consider any Bodie Collectiue, be it more or lesse vniuersall, whensoeuer it assembles it selfe, Did it euer giue more power E to the Representing Bodie of it, than binding power vpon all par­ticulars, and it selfe too? And did it euer giue this power any otherwise, than with this Reseruation in Nature, That it would call againe, and reforme, yea, and if need were, abro­gate [Page 65] any Law, or Ordinance, vpon iust cause made euident to it. A And this Power, no Bodie Collectiue, Ecclesiasticall, or Ciuill, can put out of it selfe, or giue away to a Parliament, or Councell, or call it what you will, that represents it: And in my Consi­deration, it holds strongest in the Church. For a Councell hath power to order, settle, and define Differences arisen con­cerning the Faith. This Power the Councell hath not by any immediate Institution from Christ, but it was prudently taken vp in the Church, from the Act. 15. In No­uo Testamento ex­emplum celebrati­onis Conciliorum ab Apostolis ha­bemus, &c. Iob. de [...], sum. de Ecclesia, l. 3. c. 2. Apostles Example. So that to hold Councels to this end, is apparant Apostolicall Tradition written: but the Power which Councels so held, haue, is from B the whole Catholike Church, whose members they are; and the Churches Power, from God. And This is more reasonable a great deale than that of Bel. [...]. de Con. cap. 18. Pontificē non posse se subijcere sententiae coactiuae Conciliorum. this Power the Church cannot further giue away to a Generall Councell, than that the Decrees of it shall bind all particulars, and it selfe; but not bind the Church from calling againe, and in the after calls vpon iust cause to order, yea, and if need be, to abrogate former Acts; I say, vpon iust cause. For if the Councell be lawfully called, and proceed orderly, and conclude according to the Rule, the Scripture; the whole Church cannot but approoue the Coun­cell, and then the Definitions of it can neuer be questioned af­ter. C And the Power of the Church hath no wrong in this, so long as no Power but her owne may meddle, or offer to in­fringe any Definition of hers, made in her representatiue Bo­die, a lawfull Generall Councell. And certaine it is, no Power but her owne may doe this. Nor doth this open any gappe to priuate spirits. For all Decisions in such a Councell, are bin­ding: And because the whole Church can meet no other way, the Councell shall remaine the Supreame, Externall, Liuing, Temporarie, Ecclesiasticall Iudge of all Controuersies. Onely the whole Church, and shee alone, hath power, when Scripture D or Demonstration is found, and peaceably tendered to her, to re­present her selfe againe in a new Councell, and in it to order what was amisse.

Nay, your Opinion is yet more vnreasonable. For you doe not onely make the Definition of a Generall Councell, but the Sentence of the Pope, infallible; nay, more infallible than it. For any Generall Councell may erre with you, if the Pope con­firme it not. So belike, this Infallibilitie rests not in the Re­presentatiue Bodie, the Councell, nor in the whole Bodie, the Church; but in your Head of the Church, the Pope of Rome. E Now the B. may aske you, To what end such a trouble, for a Generall Councell? Or wherein are wee neerer to Vnitie, if the Pope confirme it not? You answere (though not in the Conference, yet elsewhere) That the Pope erres not, especially [Page 66] [...] Sentence in a Generall Councell. And why especially? A Doth the deliberation of a Councell helpe any thing to the Conclusion? Surely no: for you hold the Conclusion Pro­pheticall, the meanes fallible; and fallible Deliberations cannot aduance to a Propheticke Conclusion. And iust as the Coun­cell is in Stapletons iudgement, for the Definition and the Proofes; so is the Pope in the iudgement of [...], lib. 6. de Locis, cap. 8. §. & quidem in. Melch Canus, and them which followed him, Propheticall in the Conclusion. The Councell then is called but onely in effect, to heare the Pope giue his Sentence in more State. Else what meanes this of Rel. Cont. 6. q. 3. A. 5. & ibid. Quià ad compes­cēdos importunos Haereticos, Conci­lij Generalis Defi­nitio illustrior est, &c. & vulgo ho­minum magis sa­tisfacit. Stapleton: The Pope, by a Councell ioyned vnto him, acquires no B new Power, or Authoritie, or certaintie in iudging, no more than a Head is the wiser, by ioyning the offices of the rest of the members to it, than it is without them? Or this of 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Bellarmine: That all the firmenesse and infallibilitie of a Generall Councell is onely from the Pope, not partly from the Pope, and partly from the Coun­cell? So belike the Presence is necessarie, not the Assistance: Which Opinion is the most groundlesse, and worthlesse, that euer offered to take possession of the Christian Church. And I am persuaded many learned men among your selues, scorne it at the very heart. C

You professe after, That you hold nothing against your Conscience. I must euer wonder much, how that can be true, since you hold this of the Popes Infallibilitie, especially by be­ing Propheticall in the Conclusion. If this be true, Why doe you not lay all your strength together, all of your whole So­cietie, and make this one Proposition euident? All Contro­uersies about matter of Faith are ended, and without anie great trouble to the Christian World, if you can make this good. Till then, this shame will follow you infallibly, and eternally, That you should make the Pope, a meere man, Prin­cipium D Fidei, a Principle of Faith; and make the mouth of Christs Vicar, sole Iudge both of his Word, be it neuer so ma­nifest, and of his Church, be shee neuer so learned, and care­full of his Truth.

The Conference growes to an end, and I must meet it a­gaine, ere wee part: For you say,

F.

After this, we all rising (the doubting Person) asked the B. Whether shee might be saued in the Romane Faith? E Hee answered, Shee might.

B.

What? Not one Answere perfectly related? The Bi­shops Answere to this was generall, for the ignorant, that [Page 67] could not discerne the Errors of that Church; so they held A the Foundation, and conformed themselues to a Religious life. But why doe you not speake out, what the B. added in this particular? That it must needs goe harder with the doubting partie, euen in point of Saluation; because the said partie had beene brought to vnderstand verie much in these controuerted Causes of Religion. And a man that comes to know much, had need care­fully bethinke himselfe, that hee oppose not knowne Truth, against the Church that made him a Christian. For Saluation may be in the Church of Rome, and yet they not find it, that make sure of it. B

F.

I bad (the Person doubting) marke that.

B.

This Answer I am sure troubles not you. But it seemes you would faine haue it lay a Load of Enuie vpon the B. that you professe you bad the doubting partie so carefully Marke that.

Well, you bad the said person Marke that. For what? For some great matter? or for some new? Not for some new, sure. For the Protestants haue euer beene readie for Truth, C and in Charitie, to graunt as much as might be: And there­fore from the beginning, Luther. lib. de [...] arbitr. Mor­nay. Tract. de Ec­clesia, c. 9. G. Ab­bot. nunc Archie­piscopus [...]. Answ. to Hill. ad Rat. 1. §. 30. & ad Rat. 3. §. 5. Hoo­ker, lib. 3. §. 1. & Conc. in Abac. 1. 4. Field, l. 3. c. 47. &c. 6. Though some of these put in some Exceptions. many learned men graunted this. So that you need not haue put such a serious Marke that, vpon the speech of the B. as if none before him had, or none but hee would speake it. And if your Marke that, were not for some new matter, was it for some great? Yes sure, it was. For what greater than Saluation? But then I pray Marke this too, That Might be saued, graunts but a Possibilitie, no sure or safe way to Saluation. The Possibilitie I thinke cannot be de­nyed the Ignorants especially, because they hold the Foun­dation, D and suruey not the Building: And the Foundation can deceiue no man that rests vpon it. But a secure way they cannot goe, that hold with such corruptions, when they know them. Now whether it be wisedome in such a point as Sal­uation is, to forsake a Church, in the which the ground of Saluation is firme, to follow a Church in which it is possible one may be saued, but verie probable one may doe worse, if he looke not well to the Foundation; iudge yee: I am sure S. Augustine 1 de Bap. cont. Don. c. 3. Grauiter peccarent in rebus ad salutem animae pertinentibus, &c. [...] solo quod cer­tis incerta praepo­nerent. thought it was not, and iudged it a great sinne, in point of Saluation, for a man to preferre incerta certis, incer­tainties E and naked possibilitiesbefore an euident and certaine course. And you your selues, in the point of condignitie of Merit, write it and preach it boysterously to the people; but are [Page 68] content to die, renouncing the condignitie of all your A owne Merits, and trust to Christs. If you will not venture to die as you liue, liue and beleeue in time, as you meane to die.

And one thing more, because you bid Marke this, let me re­member to tell, for the benefit of others. Vpon this verie Point (That wee acknowledge an honest ignorant Papist may be sa­ued) you, and your like, worke vpon the aduantage of our Charitie, and your owne want of it, to abuse the weake.

For thus (I am told) you worke vpon them: ‘You see the Prote­stants (at least manie of them) confesse there may be Saluation in B our Church; wee absolutely denie there is Saluation in theirs: therefore it is safer to come to ours, than to stay in theirs; to be where almost all graunt saluation, than where the greater part of the World denie it.’

This Argument is verie preuayling with men that cannot weigh it; and with women especially, that are put in feare by violent (though causelesse) denying Hea­uen vnto them. But it is stronger in the cunning, than the true force of it. For all Arguments are verie moouing, that lay their ground vpon the Aduersaries Confession; especial­ly, if it be confessed and auouched to be true. But if you C would speake truly, and say, Manie Protestants indeed con­fesse, there is Saluation possible to be attained in the Romane Church, but yet the Errors of that Church are so manie (and some, such as weaken the Foundation) that it is verie hard to goe that way to Heauen, especially to them that haue had the Truth manifested; the heart of this Argument were broken.

Besides, the force of this Argument lyes vpon two things, one expressed, the other vpon the By.

First, That which is expressed, is, Wee and our Aduersa­ries D consent, That there is saluation to some in the Romane Church. What? would you haue vs as malicious (at least as rash) as your selues are to vs, and denie you so much as possi­bilitie of saluation? If wee should, wee might make you in some things straine for a Proofe. But wee haue not so lear­ned Christ, as eyther to returne euill for euill in this headie course, or to denie Saluation to some ignorant silly Soules, whose humble, peaceable obedience, makes them safe among any part of men, that professe the Foundation, Christ. And therefore seeke not to helpe our cause, by denying this com­fort E to silly Christians, as you most fiercely doe, where you can come to worke vpon them. And this was an old Tricke of the Donatists: For in the Point of Baptisme (Whether that [Page 69] [...] Church, or in the part of Do­natus) A they [...] all to be baptised among them: Why? because both parts [...], that [...] was true [...] the [...]; which that peeuish Sect most vniustly denyed the sound part, as S. Augustine Esse verò apud Donatistas Baptis­mum, & illi asse­runt, & nos conce­dimus, &c. Lib. 1. de Bap. cont. Don. c. 3. deliuers it. I would aske now, Had not they Orthodoxe Baptisme among them, because the Donatists denyed it iniuriously? Or should the Orthodoxe, a­gainst Truth, haue denyed Baptisme among the Donatists, to crie [...] with them? Or that their Argument might not be the stronger, because both parts graunted? But marke this; how farre you runne from all common Principles of B Christian Peace, as well as Christian Truth, while you denie Saluation most vniustly to vs, from which you are further off your selues. Besides, if this were or could be made a conclu­ding Argument, I pray why doe not you beleeue with vs in the Point of the Eucharist? For all sides agree in the Faith of the Church of England, That in the most blessed Sacra­ment, the worthie Receiuer is by his Spiritualis mā ­ducatio quod per animam fit, ad Christi carnem in Sacramento per­tingit. Caiet. To. 2. Opusc. de Euchar. Tr. 2. c. 5. Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and Reall Bodie and Bloud of Christ, truly and really, and of all the benefits of his Passion. Your [...] adde a manner of this his presence, Transub­stantiation, C which manie denie; and the Lutherans a manner of this presence, Consubstantiation, which more denie. If this Argument be good, then euen for this consent, it is safer communicating with the Church of England, than with the Romane or Lutheran, because all agree in this Truth, not in any other Opinion. And therefore, if you will force the Argu­ment, to make that the safest way of Saluation, which differing parts agree on; Why doe you not yeeld to the force of the same Argument, in the [...] of the Sacrament, one of the most immediate meanes of Saluation, where not onely the D most, but all agree?

Secondly, The other vpon the By, which helpesthis Ar­gument, is your continuall poore Out-crie against vs, That wee cannot be saued, because wee are [...] of the Church. Sure if I thoughtI were out, I would get in as fast as I could. But what doe you meane by Out of the Church? Sure, out of the Romane Church. Why, but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Ca­tholike Church, which is spread ouer the face of the Earth. Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwells, E but Rome it selfe, as well as other particular Churches, dwells in this great Vniuersall House; vnlesse you will shut vp the Church in Rome, as the Donatists did in Africke. I come a [Page 70] little lower. Rome, and other [...] [...], are in this A [...] And Daugh­ter Sion was Gods owne [...] of old, of the Church. Isai. 1. 8. [...], Hyppol. Orat. de Consum. Mundi. Et omnis Ecclesia Virgo appellata est. S. Aug. Tr. 13. in S. Ioh. [...], to whom ( [...] Christ) the care of the Household is committed by God the Father, and the Catholike Church, the Mother, of [...] Christians. Rome, as an elder Sister, had a great [...] commit­ted vnto her in and from the prime times of the Church, and to her Bishop in her: but at this time (to [...] passe manie [...] that [...] formerly beene in the House) England, and some other Sisters of hers, are fallen out in the House. What then? Will the Father and the Mother, God and the Church, [...] one Child out, because another is angrie with it? Or when B did Christ giue that Power to the Elder Sister, [...] and her [...], the Bishop there, should thrust out what Child [...] pleased? Especially when shee her selfe is [...] accused to haue giuen the offence, that is taken in the House? Or will not both Father and Mother be sharper to her for this vn­iust and vnnaturall vsage of her younger Sisters, but their [...] Children? Nay, is it not the next way to make them [...] her out of doores, that is so [...] to the rest? It is well for all Christian men, and Churches, that the Father and Mother of them are [...] so [...], as some would haue them. C And Saluation need not be feared of any [...] Child, [...] outing from the Church; because this Elder [...] are dis­couered in the House, and [...] growne [...] for it to them that complayned. But as Children crie when they are awaked, so doe you, and [...] with all that come [...] you. And Returne of vn­truths vpon M. Iew­el, Ar. 4. fol. 67. [...] confesses, That yee were in [...] dead sleepe, [...] much [...], when the [...] you. Now if you can prooue, that Rome is [...] the Catholike Church it selfe (as you commonly call it) speake out and [...] it. In the meane time you may [...] too, if you will; and D it seemes you doe: for here you forget [...] what the B. said to you.

[...].

The doubting Person (said the B. to me) may be better saued in it, than you.

B.

[...] Rom. 14.4. E [Page 71] [...] (that is, easier) than you; than [...] man, that knowes so A much of Truth, and opposes against it, as you and your [...] doe. How farre you know Truth, other men may iudge by your proofes, and causes of Knowledge; but how [...] you oppose it when it is knowne, that is within, and no man can know, but God and your selues. Howsoeuer, where the Foundation is but held, there for Caeteram tur­bam non intelli­gēdi viuacitas sed credendi simplici­tas tutissimam fa­cit. S. August. cont. Fund. c. 4. ordinarie men, it is not the [...] of vnderstanding, but the simplicitie of beleeuing, that makes them safe. For Saint Augustiue speakes there of men in the Church; and no man can be simply said to be out of the visible Church, that is baptized, and holds the Foun­dation. B And as it is the simplicitie of beleeuing, that makes them safe, yea safest; so is it sometimes a quicknesse of vn­derstanding; that louing it selfe and some by respects too well, makes men take vp an vnsafe way about the Faith. So that there is no question, but manie were saued in corrupted times of the Church, when their Ipsis Magistris pereuntibus: nisi fortè ante mortem resipuerint. Luth. de Seru. Arb. Leaders, vnlesse they re­pented before death, were lost. And Saint Augustines De vtil. Cred. c. 1. Si mihi vide­retur vnus & idem Haereticus & Hae­reticis credens ho­mo, &c. Rule will be true, That in all Corruptions of the Church, there will euer be a difference betweene an Heretike and a plaine well­meaning man, that is mis-led, and beleeues an Heretike. I pray you C Marke this, and so by Gods grace will I. For our Reckoning will bee heauier, if wee mis-lead on eytherside, than theirs [...] vs. But I see I must looke to my selfe, for you are secure: For,

F.

D r White (said I) hath secured me, that none of our Errors be damnable, so long as wee hold them not against our Conscience. And I hold none against my Conscience. D

B.

It seemes then you haue two Securities, D r Whites Assertion, and your Conscience. What Assurance D r White [...] you, I cannot tell of my selfe; nor as things stand, may I rest vpon your Relation: It may be you vse him no better than you doe the Bishop. And sure it is so: For I haue since spoken with D r White, and hee auowes this, and no o­ther Answere.

Hee was asked in the conferense betweene you, ‘Whether Popish Errors were Fundamentall? To [...] hee gaue [...], by distinction of the persons which held and professed the E Errors: namely, That the Errors were Fundamentall, reductiue, by a Reducement, if they which embraced them, [...] adhere to them, hauing sufficient [...] to be better enformed: [Page 72] nay further, that they were materially, and in the verie kind and na­ture A of them, Leauen, Drosse, Hay, and Stubble. Yet hee thought 1. Cor. 3.12. withall, that such as were mis-led by Education, or long Custome, or over-valuing the [...] of the [...] Church, and did in [...] of heart embrace them, might by their generall [...], and Faith in the Merit of Christ, attended with Charitie [...] other Vertues, find mercie at Gods hands. But that hee should say Signanter, and expressely, That none eyther of yours, or your fellowes [...], were damnable, so long as you hold them not against Con­science; that hee vtterly disauowes. You deliuered nothing, to [...] such a Confession from him. And for your selfe, hee could ob­serue B but small loue of Truth, few signes of Grace in you (as hee tells mee:) Yet hee will not presume to iudge you, or your Sal­uation; it is the Word of Christ that must iudge you, as the S. Ioh. 12.48. latter Day.’

For your Conscience, you are the happier in your Error, that you hold nothing against it; especially, if you speake not against it, while you say so. But this no man can know, but your Conscience: For no man knowes the thoughts of a man, 1. Cor. 2. 11. but the spirit of a man that is within him; to which I leaue you. But yet you leaue not: For you tell me, C

F.

The (doubting partie) asked, Whether shee might be saued in the Protestants Faith? Vpon [...] Soule (said the B.) you may. Vpon my Soule (said I) there is but one sauing Faith, and that is the Romane.

B.

So (it seemes) the B. was confident for the Faith pro­fessed in the Church of England; else hee would not haue ta­ken D the Saluation of another vpon his Soule. And sure hee had reason of his Confidence. For to beleeue the Scripture, and the Creeds; to beleeue these in the sense of the antient Primitiue Church; to receiue the foure great Generall Coun­cels, so much magnified by Antiquitie; to beleeue all Points of Doctrine, generally receiued as Fundamentall, in the Church of Christ; is a Faith, in which to liue and die, cannot but giue Saluation. And therefore the B. went vpon a sure ground, in the aduenture of his Soule vpon that Faith. Besides, in all the Points of Doctrine that are controuerted betweene vs. E I would faine see anie one Point, maintained by the Church of England, that can bee prooued to depart from the Founda­tion. You haue manie dangerous Errors about it, in that [Page 73] which you call the Romane Faith. But there I leaue you, to A looke to your owne Soule, and theirs whom you seduce. Yet this is true too, That there is but one sauing Faith. But then euerie thing which you call De Fide, Of the Faith, because some Councell or other hath defined it, is not such a breach from that one sauing Faith, as that hee which expressely be­leeues it not, nay, as that hee which beleeues the contrarie, is excluded from Saluation. And 3. De Eccl. Mil. c. 14. Bellarmine is forced to graunt this, There are manie things, de Fide, which are not ab­solutely necessarie to Saluation. Waldens. Doct. Fid. l. 2. A. 2. §. 23. Therefore there is a Latitude in Faith, especially in reference to Saluation. To set a Bound B to this, and strictly to define it, Iust thus farre you must be­leeue in euerie particular, or incurre Damnation, is no worke for my Penne. These two things I am sure of: One, That your peremptorie establishing of so manie things, that are remote Deductions from the Foundation, hath with other Errors, lost the Peace and Vnitie of the Church; for which you will one day answere. And the other, That you are gone further from the Foundation of this one sauing Faith, than can euer bee prooued wee haue done. But to conclude, you tell vs, C

F.

Vpon this and the precedent Conferences, the Ladie rested in iudgement fully satisfied (as shee told a confi­dent friend) of the Truth of the Romane Churches Faith. Yet vpon frailetie, and feare to offend the King, shee yeelded to goe to Church: For which, shee was after verie sorrie, as some of her friends can testifie. D

B.

This is all personall. And how that Honourable Ladie is settled in Conscience, how in Iudgement, I know not. This (I thinke) is made cleare enough, That that which you said in this and the precedent Conferences, could settle ney­ther, vnlesse in some that were settled, or setting before. As little doe I know, what shee told anie Friend of the Ro­mane Cause: No more, whether it were frailetie, or feare, that made her yeeld to goe to Church; nor how sorrie shee was for it; nor who can testifie that sorrow. This I am sure of; If shee repent, and God forgiue her other sinnes, shee will E farre more easily bee able to answere for her comming to Church, than shee will for the leauing of the Church of Eng­land, and following the Superstitions and Errors which the [Page 74] Romane Church hath added in point of Faith, and worship of A God.

I pray God giue her Mercie, and all of you a Light of his Truth, and a Loue to it first; that you may no longer be made Instruments of the Popes boundlesse Ambition, and this most vnchristian braine-sicke Deuice, That in all Contro­uersies of the Faith hee is infallible, and that by way of Inspiration and Prophesie, in the Conclusion which hee giues. To due consideration of this, and Gods Mercie in Christ, I leaue B you.

FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.